Wiki2Web Studio

Create complete, beautiful interactive educational materials in less than 5 minutes.

Print flashcards, homework worksheets, exams/quizzes, study guides, & more.

Export your learner materials as an interactive game, a webpage, or FAQ style cheatsheet.

Unsaved Work Found!

It looks like you have unsaved work from a previous session. Would you like to restore it?



The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

At a Glance

Title: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

Total Categories: 5

Category Stats

  • ARRA: Overview and Economic Rationale: 4 flashcards, 7 questions
  • ARRA: Legislative Process and Political Landscape: 6 flashcards, 6 questions
  • ARRA: Funding Allocations and Key Initiatives: 27 flashcards, 36 questions
  • ARRA: Economic Impact and Analysis: 15 flashcards, 21 questions
  • ARRA: Oversight, Transparency, and Criticisms: 5 flashcards, 8 questions

Total Stats

  • Total Flashcards: 57
  • True/False Questions: 47
  • Multiple Choice Questions: 31
  • Total Questions: 78

Instructions

Click the button to expand the instructions for how to use the Wiki2Web Teacher studio in order to print, edit, and export data about The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

Welcome to Your Curriculum Command Center

This guide will turn you into a Wiki2web Studio power user. Let's unlock the features designed to give you back your weekends.

The Core Concept: What is a "Kit"?

Think of a Kit as your all-in-one digital lesson plan. It's a single, portable file that contains every piece of content for a topic: your subject categories, a central image, all your flashcards, and all your questions. The true power of the Studio is speed—once a kit is made (or you import one), you are just minutes away from printing an entire set of coursework.

Getting Started is Simple:

  • Create New Kit: Start with a clean slate. Perfect for a brand-new lesson idea.
  • Import & Edit Existing Kit: Load a .json kit file from your computer to continue your work or to modify a kit created by a colleague.
  • Restore Session: The Studio automatically saves your progress in your browser. If you get interrupted, you can restore your unsaved work with one click.

Step 1: Laying the Foundation (The Authoring Tools)

This is where you build the core knowledge of your Kit. Use the left-side navigation panel to switch between these powerful authoring modules.

⚙️ Kit Manager: Your Kit's Identity

This is the high-level control panel for your project.

  • Kit Name: Give your Kit a clear title. This will appear on all your printed materials.
  • Master Image: Upload a custom cover image for your Kit. This is essential for giving your content a professional visual identity, and it's used as the main graphic when you export your Kit as an interactive game.
  • Topics: Create the structure for your lesson. Add topics like "Chapter 1," "Vocabulary," or "Key Formulas." All flashcards and questions will be organized under these topics.

🃏 Flashcard Author: Building the Knowledge Blocks

Flashcards are the fundamental concepts of your Kit. Create them here to define terms, list facts, or pose simple questions.

  • Click "➕ Add New Flashcard" to open the editor.
  • Fill in the term/question and the definition/answer.
  • Assign the flashcard to one of your pre-defined topics.
  • To edit or remove a flashcard, simply use the ✏️ (Edit) or ❌ (Delete) icons next to any entry in the list.

✍️ Question Author: Assessing Understanding

Create a bank of questions to test knowledge. These questions are the engine for your worksheets and exams.

  • Click "➕ Add New Question".
  • Choose a Type: True/False for quick checks or Multiple Choice for more complex assessments.
  • To edit an existing question, click the ✏️ icon. You can change the question text, options, correct answer, and explanation at any time.
  • The Explanation field is a powerful tool: the text you enter here will automatically appear on the teacher's answer key and on the Smart Study Guide, providing instant feedback.

🔗 Intelligent Mapper: The Smart Connection

This is the secret sauce of the Studio. The Mapper transforms your content from a simple list into an interconnected web of knowledge, automating the creation of amazing study guides.

  • Step 1: Select a question from the list on the left.
  • Step 2: In the right panel, click on every flashcard that contains a concept required to answer that question. They will turn green, indicating a successful link.
  • The Payoff: When you generate a Smart Study Guide, these linked flashcards will automatically appear under each question as "Related Concepts."

Step 2: The Magic (The Generator Suite)

You've built your content. Now, with a few clicks, turn it into a full suite of professional, ready-to-use materials. What used to take hours of formatting and copying-and-pasting can now be done in seconds.

🎓 Smart Study Guide Maker

Instantly create the ultimate review document. It combines your questions, the correct answers, your detailed explanations, and all the "Related Concepts" you linked in the Mapper into one cohesive, printable guide.

📝 Worksheet & 📄 Exam Builder

Generate unique assessments every time. The questions and multiple-choice options are randomized automatically. Simply select your topics, choose how many questions you need, and generate:

  • A Student Version, clean and ready for quizzing.
  • A Teacher Version, complete with a detailed answer key and the explanations you wrote.

🖨️ Flashcard Printer

Forget wrestling with table layouts in a word processor. Select a topic, choose a cards-per-page layout, and instantly generate perfectly formatted, print-ready flashcard sheets.

Step 3: Saving and Collaborating

  • 💾 Export & Save Kit: This is your primary save function. It downloads the entire Kit (content, images, and all) to your computer as a single .json file. Use this to create permanent backups and share your work with others.
  • ➕ Import & Merge Kit: Combine your work. You can merge a colleague's Kit into your own or combine two of your lessons into a larger review Kit.

You're now ready to reclaim your time.

You're not just a teacher; you're a curriculum designer, and this is your Studio.

This page is an interactive visualization based on the Wikipedia article "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009" (opens in new tab) and its cited references.

Text content is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (opens in new tab). Additional terms may apply.

Disclaimer: This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute any kind of advice. The information is not a substitute for consulting official sources or records or seeking advice from qualified professionals.


Owned and operated by Artificial General Intelligence LLC, a Michigan Registered LLC
Prompt engineering done with Gracekits.com
All rights reserved
Sitemaps | Contact

Export Options





Study Guide: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

Study Guide: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

ARRA: Overview and Economic Rationale

The primary objective of the ARRA was to stimulate the economy by creating jobs and saving existing ones.

Answer: True

The primary objective of the ARRA was to stimulate the economy by saving existing jobs and creating new ones in response to the Great Recession.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and what was its primary goal?: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Its primary objective was to save existing jobs and create new ones as quickly as possible in response to the Great Recession.
  • Beyond job creation, what other objectives did the ARRA aim to achieve?: In addition to saving and creating jobs, the ARRA aimed to provide temporary relief programs for individuals most affected by the recession. It also focused on making investments in key areas such as infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy to foster long-term economic benefits.

In addition to job creation, the ARRA aimed to provide temporary relief and invest in areas like infrastructure and education.

Answer: True

Beyond saving and creating jobs, the ARRA aimed to offer temporary relief to those most affected by the recession and to make investments in critical sectors such as infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy.

Related Concepts:

  • Beyond job creation, what other objectives did the ARRA aim to achieve?: In addition to saving and creating jobs, the ARRA aimed to provide temporary relief programs for individuals most affected by the recession. It also focused on making investments in key areas such as infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy to foster long-term economic benefits.
  • What were the main categories of federal spending programs funded by the ARRA?: The federal spending programs funded by the ARRA included investments in transportation, communication, wastewater, and sewer infrastructure improvements. It also funded energy efficiency upgrades in private and federal buildings, extended federal unemployment benefits, and supported scientific research programs.

The ARRA was primarily based on Supply-side economic theory.

Answer: False

The ARRA was rooted in Keynesian economic theory, which advocates for government intervention to stimulate demand during economic downturns, rather than supply-side theory which focuses on tax cuts and deregulation.

Related Concepts:

  • On what economic theory was the ARRA based?: The rationale behind the ARRA was rooted in Keynesian economic theory. This theory suggests that during economic downturns, government intervention through increased public spending can counteract the decrease in private spending, thereby saving jobs and preventing further economic decline.

Most economists believe the ARRA was larger than necessary to combat the Great Recession.

Answer: False

The consensus among most economists is that the ARRA was likely smaller than what might have been optimally required to fully counteract the Great Recession, though its benefits are generally considered to have outweighed its costs.

Related Concepts:

  • What is the general consensus among economists regarding the ARRA's effectiveness?: Most economists agree that the stimulus package was smaller than what might have been needed to fully address the recession. However, surveys indicate overwhelming agreement that the ARRA did reduce unemployment and that its benefits ultimately outweighed its costs.

A group of economists, including Nobel laureates Prescott and Smith, opposed the ARRA, advocating for lower tax rates and reduced government burdens.

Answer: True

A group of economists, including Nobel laureates Edward C. Prescott and Vernon L. Smith, publicly opposed the ARRA, arguing that fiscal policy should prioritize lower tax rates and reduced government burdens to stimulate economic growth.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the stance of economists who placed a full-page ad in The New York Times and Wall Street Journal opposing Obama's stimulus plan?: These economists, including Nobel laureates Edward C. Prescott, Vernon L. Smith, and James M. Buchanan, believed that policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment, and production. They argued that lower tax rates and reduced government burdens were the best fiscal policy tools for boosting growth, directly contradicting the stimulus approach.

What was the primary goal of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)?

Answer: To stimulate the economy by saving and creating jobs.

The primary objective of the ARRA was to stimulate the economy by saving existing jobs and creating new ones in response to the Great Recession.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and what was its primary goal?: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Its primary objective was to save existing jobs and create new ones as quickly as possible in response to the Great Recession.

Which economic theory formed the basis for the ARRA?

Answer: Keynesian Economics

The ARRA was rooted in Keynesian economic theory, which posits that government intervention through increased spending can mitigate economic downturns by stimulating demand.

Related Concepts:

  • On what economic theory was the ARRA based?: The rationale behind the ARRA was rooted in Keynesian economic theory. This theory suggests that during economic downturns, government intervention through increased public spending can counteract the decrease in private spending, thereby saving jobs and preventing further economic decline.

ARRA: Legislative Process and Political Landscape

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

Answer: False

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law by President Barack Obama, not President George W. Bush.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and what was its primary goal?: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Its primary objective was to save existing jobs and create new ones as quickly as possible in response to the Great Recession.

No Republican members of the House voted for the ARRA, but three Republican senators supported it.

Answer: True

Reflecting significant partisan division, no Republican members in the House of Representatives voted for the ARRA, although three Republican senators did support its passage.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the political reception of the ARRA, particularly from Republicans?: The politics surrounding the ARRA were highly contentious. Republicans criticized the size of the stimulus package, and not a single Republican member of the House voted for it, while only three Republican senators supported it. The opposition from Republicans may have contributed to the Tea Party movement and the Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections.

The Senate version of the ARRA included a one-year extension for revisions to the alternative minimum tax, adding significant cost.

Answer: True

A key difference between the House and Senate versions of the ARRA was the Senate's inclusion of a one-year extension for alternative minimum tax adjustments, which increased the bill's overall cost.

Related Concepts:

  • What significant difference existed between the House and Senate versions of the ARRA?: A notable difference was the Senate's inclusion of a one-year extension for revisions to the alternative minimum tax, which added approximately $70 billion to the bill's total cost compared to the House version.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) created a 'Hypocrisy Hall of Fame' to list Republicans who voted for the ARRA but later criticized it.

Answer: False

The DCCC created a 'Hypocrisy Hall of Fame' to highlight Republicans who voted against the ARRA but subsequently claimed credit for ARRA-funded projects in their districts.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the DCCC's 'Hypocrisy Hall of Fame' initiative?: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) created a 'Hypocrisy Hall of Fame' to list Republican Representatives who had voted against the ARRA but subsequently sought or took credit for ARRA-funded programs in their districts. As of September 2011, they had listed 128 House Republicans in this category.

How did Republicans generally react to the ARRA during its passage?

Answer: They criticized its size, and no House Republicans voted for it.

Republicans largely criticized the ARRA's substantial cost, resulting in no House Republicans voting in favor of the bill, although three senators did support it.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the political reception of the ARRA, particularly from Republicans?: The politics surrounding the ARRA were highly contentious. Republicans criticized the size of the stimulus package, and not a single Republican member of the House voted for it, while only three Republican senators supported it. The opposition from Republicans may have contributed to the Tea Party movement and the Republican gains in the 2010 midterm elections.

What was a significant difference between the House and Senate versions of the ARRA?

Answer: The Senate version extended the alternative minimum tax revision for one year.

A notable divergence between the House and Senate versions of the ARRA was the Senate's inclusion of a one-year extension for alternative minimum tax revisions, which added considerable cost to the bill.

Related Concepts:

  • What significant difference existed between the House and Senate versions of the ARRA?: A notable difference was the Senate's inclusion of a one-year extension for revisions to the alternative minimum tax, which added approximately $70 billion to the bill's total cost compared to the House version.

ARRA: Funding Allocations and Key Initiatives

The ARRA was initially estimated to cost $500 billion, with later revisions placing the total cost around $700 billion.

Answer: False

The ARRA was initially estimated to cost approximately $787 billion, with later revisions placing the total cost between $831 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's impact on the federal budget deficit according to the CBO?: The CBO estimated that the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion in the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $399 billion in 2010, and by $134 billion in 2011, totaling $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.
  • What was the estimated cost of the ARRA at the time of its passage, and how was it later revised?: The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was initially estimated at $787 billion when it was passed. This figure was later revised, with estimates placing the total cost between $831 billion for the period of 2009 to 2019.

The ARRA allocated the largest portion of its funding, over 45%, to tax incentives for individuals.

Answer: False

The ARRA allocated 45% of its funding to federal spending programs, 37% to tax incentives, and 18% to state and local fiscal relief. Tax incentives for individuals constituted a significant portion of the 37% allocated to tax incentives.

Related Concepts:

  • How was the ARRA's funding allocated among its main components?: The Act specified that approximately 37% of its total funding, amounting to $288 billion, was dedicated to tax incentives. Another 18%, or $144 billion, was allocated to state and local fiscal relief, with over 90% of that aid directed towards Medicaid and education. The remaining 45%, totaling $357 billion, was designated for federal spending programs.

Federal spending programs funded by the ARRA included investments in transportation, energy efficiency, and unemployment benefits.

Answer: True

Federal spending programs supported by the ARRA encompassed investments in transportation infrastructure, energy efficiency upgrades, extensions of federal unemployment benefits, and support for scientific research.

Related Concepts:

  • What were the main categories of federal spending programs funded by the ARRA?: The federal spending programs funded by the ARRA included investments in transportation, communication, wastewater, and sewer infrastructure improvements. It also funded energy efficiency upgrades in private and federal buildings, extended federal unemployment benefits, and supported scientific research programs.

The ARRA provided $237 billion in tax incentives specifically for companies.

Answer: False

The ARRA allocated $237 billion in tax incentives for individuals. Tax incentives for companies totaled $51 billion.

Related Concepts:

  • What tax incentives were provided for companies under the ARRA?: The ARRA allocated $51 billion in tax incentives for companies. These included provisions allowing companies to use current losses to offset previous profits for tax refunds, extending tax credits for renewable energy production, and modifying bonus depreciation rules for businesses purchasing equipment.
  • What was the total amount allocated for tax incentives for individuals under the ARRA?: The ARRA allocated $237 billion towards tax incentives for individuals. This included a new payroll tax credit, adjustments to the alternative minimum tax, expansions of the child tax credit and earned income tax credit, and credits for college tuition and home energy efficiency.

A payroll tax credit of $400 per worker was introduced under the ARRA for 2009 and 2010.

Answer: True

The ARRA introduced a new payroll tax credit, providing $400 per worker or $800 per couple for the tax years 2009 and 2010.

Related Concepts:

  • What specific tax incentive was provided for individuals related to their paychecks?: A new payroll tax credit was introduced, providing $400 per worker and $800 per couple for 2009 and 2010. This credit began phasing out for individuals earning over $75,000 and couples earning over $150,000.

The ARRA expanded the child tax credit, making it accessible only to families who owed federal income taxes.

Answer: False

The ARRA expanded the child tax credit, allocating $15 billion to make the credit accessible to more families, including those who did not owe federal income taxes.

Related Concepts:

  • What changes were made to the child tax credit under the ARRA?: The ARRA expanded the child tax credit, allocating $15 billion to make the $1,000 credit accessible to more families, including those who did not owe federal income taxes. This expansion aimed to provide greater relief to low-income workers with children.

The ARRA included an $8,000 refundable credit for homes purchased between January 1, 2009, and December 1, 2009.

Answer: True

The Act provided an $8,000 refundable credit for homes purchased within a specified period in 2009, with provisions for repayment repeal for first-time homebuyers.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the homebuyer credit provision in the ARRA?: The Act provided an $8,000 refundable credit for all homes purchased between January 1, 2009, and December 1, 2009. Additionally, the repayment provision for this credit was repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held for more than three years, specifically for first-time homebuyers.

The ARRA allocated $155.1 billion to transportation infrastructure projects.

Answer: False

The ARRA allocated a total of $105.3 billion to infrastructure, with $48.1 billion specifically designated for transportation projects.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total investment in infrastructure under the ARRA, and what were the major components?: The ARRA invested a total of $105.3 billion in infrastructure. The largest portion, $48.1 billion, was dedicated to transportation projects like highways, bridges, and rail. Other significant investments were made in water, sewage, environmental protection, and public lands.

The HITECH Act, part of the ARRA, focused on promoting the adoption of health information technology.

Answer: True

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, enacted as part of the ARRA, allocated $25.8 billion to promote the adoption and meaningful use of health information technology.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the HITECH Act, and how did it relate to the ARRA?: The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act was enacted as part of the ARRA. It aimed to promote the adoption and meaningful use of health information technology, allocating $25.8 billion for investments and incentive payments in this area.
  • How did the ARRA impact healthcare spending and policy?: The ARRA allocated $155.1 billion to healthcare, significantly boosting spending on Medicaid ($86.8 billion) to help states. It also invested $25.8 billion in health information technology (HITECH Act), provided subsidies for the unemployed to continue health insurance under COBRA ($25.1 billion), and funded health research and facility construction.

Approximately $100 billion was allocated to education under the ARRA, with a significant portion for Pell Grants.

Answer: True

The ARRA allocated approximately $100 billion to education, including substantial funding for Pell Grants, aid to school districts, and programs for special education and early childhood development.

The ARRA provided aid for low-income workers, the unemployed, and retirees, totaling over $100 billion.

Answer: False

The ARRA provided $82.2 billion for aid to low-income workers, the unemployed, and retirees, which included extending unemployment benefits, enhancing food assistance programs, and providing one-time payments to Social Security recipients.

Related Concepts:

  • How did the ARRA aim to assist low-income workers, the unemployed, and retirees?: The Act provided $82.2 billion for aid in these areas. This included extending unemployment benefits, increasing them by $25 per week, enhancing the Food Stamp Program, providing one-time payments to Social Security and SSI recipients, and funding job training programs.

Transportation projects received the largest portion of the ARRA's infrastructure funding.

Answer: True

Within the $105.3 billion allocated for infrastructure, transportation projects received the largest share, amounting to $48.1 billion for highways, bridges, and rail.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total investment in infrastructure under the ARRA, and what were the major components?: The ARRA invested a total of $105.3 billion in infrastructure. The largest portion, $48.1 billion, was dedicated to transportation projects like highways, bridges, and rail. Other significant investments were made in water, sewage, environmental protection, and public lands.
  • How much funding was allocated for transportation infrastructure, and what specific projects were prioritized?: A total of $48.1 billion was allocated for transportation infrastructure. Priority was given to highway and bridge construction projects ($27.5 billion), intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail projects ($8 billion), and new equipment for public transportation projects ($6.9 billion).

The ARRA allocated $18 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research.

Answer: False

The ARRA allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, as part of a broader $21.5 billion investment in energy infrastructure.

Related Concepts:

  • How did the ARRA support energy infrastructure and efficiency initiatives?: The ARRA invested $21.5 billion in energy infrastructure, including $6 billion for cleanup of radioactive waste and $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology. It also allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, such as weatherizing homes and supporting renewable energy loan guarantees.

The ARRA provided $14.7 billion for housing programs, including repairs for public housing and rental assistance.

Answer: True

The ARRA allocated $14.7 billion towards housing programs, supporting public housing repairs, low-income housing financing, rental assistance, and the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total funding allocated for housing programs under the ARRA?: The ARRA allocated $14.7 billion towards housing programs. These funds were designated for repairing and modernizing public housing, financing low-income housing construction, providing Section 8 rental assistance, and supporting the Neighborhood Stabilization Program to purchase and repair foreclosed properties.

The ARRA dedicated $7.6 billion to scientific research, with NASA being the largest recipient.

Answer: False

While the ARRA dedicated $7.6 billion to scientific research, the National Science Foundation ($3 billion) and the Department of Energy ($2 billion) were larger recipients than NASA ($1 billion).

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total amount dedicated to scientific research through the ARRA?: The ARRA dedicated $7.6 billion to scientific research. Major recipients included the National Science Foundation ($3 billion), the U.S. Department of Energy ($2 billion), and NASA ($1 billion), supporting various scientific endeavors and facilities.

The 'Buy American' provision required that all goods used in ARRA-funded projects must be produced in the United States.

Answer: False

The 'Buy American' provision stipulated that iron, steel, and manufactured goods used in ARRA-funded public projects must be produced in the United States, but it did not mandate that *all* goods must be U.S.-produced.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the purpose of the 'Buy American' provision included in the ARRA?: The 'Buy American' provision required that iron, steel, and manufactured goods used in public building or public works projects funded by the stimulus package must be produced in the United States. This was a protectionist measure intended to support domestic industries.

The 'Buy American' provision led to an agreement between the U.S. and Canada to exempt Canadian companies from its requirements.

Answer: True

The 'Buy American' provision generated significant international concern, leading to an agreement between the U.S. and Canada to exempt Canadian companies from its requirements to avoid trade repercussions.

Related Concepts:

  • How did the 'Buy American' provision impact international trade relations, particularly with Canada?: The 'Buy American' provision caused significant backlash in the Canadian business community, leading Canada to consider its own restrictions on U.S. bidders for city contracts. Eventually, the United States and Canada reached an agreement exempting Canadian companies from these provisions to avoid harming the Canadian economy.

Section 1603 of the Recovery Act provided cash grants to solar companies instead of tax credits.

Answer: True

Section 1603 of the Recovery Act offered cash grants as an alternative to tax credits for solar companies, particularly benefiting those not yet profitable.

Related Concepts:

  • What was Section 1603 of the Recovery Act, and what action was taken regarding a Spanish company that received funds?: Section 1603 provided cash grants to solar companies to encourage investment in solar technology, offering cash instead of tax credits for companies not yet profitable. In September 2015, the U.S. government requested a Spanish company return $1 million it had received under this program, which the company stated it complied with.

President Obama acknowledged in 2010 that 'shovel-ready' infrastructure projects were indeed straightforward to implement.

Answer: False

By 2010, President Obama acknowledged that 'shovel-ready' projects were not as straightforward to implement as initially anticipated, reflecting delays in project execution.

Related Concepts:

  • What realization did President Obama have regarding 'shovel-ready' projects?: By 2010, President Obama acknowledged that the concept of 'shovel-ready' projects, which were intended to quickly generate jobs through infrastructure spending, was not as straightforward as initially believed. He stated, 'there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects,' reflecting the delays encountered in implementing many infrastructure initiatives.

The ARRA allocated $6 billion for the modernization of the electrical grid.

Answer: False

The ARRA allocated $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology, as part of a broader $21.5 billion investment in energy infrastructure.

Related Concepts:

  • How did the ARRA support energy infrastructure and efficiency initiatives?: The ARRA invested $21.5 billion in energy infrastructure, including $6 billion for cleanup of radioactive waste and $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology. It also allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, such as weatherizing homes and supporting renewable energy loan guarantees.

The ARRA included $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes.

Answer: True

The ARRA allocated $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes as part of its energy efficiency initiatives, aiming to reduce energy consumption and costs for low-income households.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's provision for weatherizing homes?: The ARRA included $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes as part of its energy efficiency initiatives. This aimed to reduce energy consumption and costs for low-income households.
  • How did the ARRA support energy infrastructure and efficiency initiatives?: The ARRA invested $21.5 billion in energy infrastructure, including $6 billion for cleanup of radioactive waste and $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology. It also allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, such as weatherizing homes and supporting renewable energy loan guarantees.

The ARRA allocated $10.5 billion for broadband expansion and government IT system upgrades.

Answer: True

The ARRA allocated $10.5 billion towards communications, information, and security technologies, including funding for broadband expansion and upgrades to government IT systems.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total allocation for communications, information, and security technologies?: The ARRA allocated $10.5 billion towards communications, information, and security technologies. This included significant funding for broadband and wireless internet access expansion, as well as upgrades to various government IT systems and security technologies.

What was the initial estimated cost of the ARRA when it was passed?

Answer: $787 billion

The initial estimated cost of the ARRA when it was passed was approximately $787 billion.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's impact on the federal budget deficit according to the CBO?: The CBO estimated that the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion in the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $399 billion in 2010, and by $134 billion in 2011, totaling $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.
  • What was the estimated cost of the ARRA at the time of its passage, and how was it later revised?: The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was initially estimated at $787 billion when it was passed. This figure was later revised, with estimates placing the total cost between $831 billion for the period of 2009 to 2019.

How was the ARRA's funding allocated among its main components?

Answer: 45% federal spending, 37% tax incentives, 18% state relief

The ARRA's funding was distributed with 45% designated for federal spending programs, 37% for tax incentives, and 18% for state and local fiscal relief.

Related Concepts:

  • How was the ARRA's funding allocated among its main components?: The Act specified that approximately 37% of its total funding, amounting to $288 billion, was dedicated to tax incentives. Another 18%, or $144 billion, was allocated to state and local fiscal relief, with over 90% of that aid directed towards Medicaid and education. The remaining 45%, totaling $357 billion, was designated for federal spending programs.

Which of the following was NOT a category of federal spending programs funded by the ARRA?

Answer: Expansion of the child tax credit

The expansion of the child tax credit was primarily a tax incentive measure, not a federal spending program category such as infrastructure, energy, or unemployment benefits.

Related Concepts:

  • What were the main categories of federal spending programs funded by the ARRA?: The federal spending programs funded by the ARRA included investments in transportation, communication, wastewater, and sewer infrastructure improvements. It also funded energy efficiency upgrades in private and federal buildings, extended federal unemployment benefits, and supported scientific research programs.

What was the total amount allocated for tax incentives for individuals under the ARRA?

Answer: $237 billion

The ARRA allocated $237 billion towards tax incentives specifically for individuals, encompassing measures like the payroll tax credit and expansions of existing credits.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total amount allocated for tax incentives for individuals under the ARRA?: The ARRA allocated $237 billion towards tax incentives for individuals. This included a new payroll tax credit, adjustments to the alternative minimum tax, expansions of the child tax credit and earned income tax credit, and credits for college tuition and home energy efficiency.

What specific tax incentive provided a credit of $400 per worker or $800 per couple for 2009 and 2010?

Answer: Payroll Tax Credit

The Payroll Tax Credit was introduced under the ARRA, offering a credit of $400 per worker or $800 per couple for 2009 and 2010.

Related Concepts:

  • What specific tax incentive was provided for individuals related to their paychecks?: A new payroll tax credit was introduced, providing $400 per worker and $800 per couple for 2009 and 2010. This credit began phasing out for individuals earning over $75,000 and couples earning over $150,000.

How did the ARRA address the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)?

Answer: It increased the AMT floor for joint filers for one year.

The ARRA included a provision to increase the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) floor for joint filers for one year, aiming to prevent a larger number of taxpayers from being subject to the AMT.

Related Concepts:

  • How did the ARRA address the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)?: The ARRA included a provision for a one-year increase in the AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for the tax year 2009. This measure aimed to prevent a significant number of taxpayers from being subject to the AMT.

What was the purpose of the HITECH Act, enacted as part of the ARRA?

Answer: To promote the adoption of health information technology.

The HITECH Act, integrated into the ARRA, was designed to foster the adoption and meaningful utilization of health information technology, allocating significant funds for this purpose.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the HITECH Act, and how did it relate to the ARRA?: The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act was enacted as part of the ARRA. It aimed to promote the adoption and meaningful use of health information technology, allocating $25.8 billion for investments and incentive payments in this area.
  • How did the ARRA impact healthcare spending and policy?: The ARRA allocated $155.1 billion to healthcare, significantly boosting spending on Medicaid ($86.8 billion) to help states. It also invested $25.8 billion in health information technology (HITECH Act), provided subsidies for the unemployed to continue health insurance under COBRA ($25.1 billion), and funded health research and facility construction.

How much funding was allocated to education under the ARRA?

Answer: $100 billion

Approximately $100 billion was allocated to education through the ARRA, supporting initiatives such as increased Pell Grants and aid to school districts.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total allocation for education under the ARRA, and what were some key provisions?: The ARRA allocated approximately $100 billion to education. Key provisions included $53.6 billion in aid to local school districts to prevent layoffs, $15.6 billion to increase Pell Grants, and funding for special education (IDEA) and Head Start programs.

What was the largest portion of the ARRA's infrastructure investment dedicated to?

Answer: Transportation projects

Within the ARRA's infrastructure funding, transportation projects received the largest allocation, encompassing highways, bridges, and rail initiatives.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total investment in infrastructure under the ARRA, and what were the major components?: The ARRA invested a total of $105.3 billion in infrastructure. The largest portion, $48.1 billion, was dedicated to transportation projects like highways, bridges, and rail. Other significant investments were made in water, sewage, environmental protection, and public lands.
  • How much funding was allocated for transportation infrastructure, and what specific projects were prioritized?: A total of $48.1 billion was allocated for transportation infrastructure. Priority was given to highway and bridge construction projects ($27.5 billion), intercity passenger rail and high-speed rail projects ($8 billion), and new equipment for public transportation projects ($6.9 billion).

How much funding was allocated for the cleanup of radioactive waste under the ARRA?

Answer: $6 billion

The ARRA allocated $6 billion specifically for the cleanup of radioactive waste, primarily from nuclear weapons production sites, as part of its energy infrastructure investments.

Related Concepts:

  • What specific funding was allocated by the ARRA for the cleanup of radioactive waste?: The ARRA allocated $6 billion specifically for the cleanup of radioactive waste, primarily from nuclear weapons production sites. This funding was part of the broader energy infrastructure investments within the Act.
  • How did the ARRA support energy infrastructure and efficiency initiatives?: The ARRA invested $21.5 billion in energy infrastructure, including $6 billion for cleanup of radioactive waste and $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology. It also allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, such as weatherizing homes and supporting renewable energy loan guarantees.

What was the purpose of the 'Buy American' provision in the ARRA?

Answer: To require U.S. production of iron, steel, and manufactured goods for funded projects.

The 'Buy American' provision mandated that iron, steel, and manufactured goods utilized in public projects funded by the stimulus must be produced domestically, aiming to bolster U.S. industries.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the purpose of the 'Buy American' provision included in the ARRA?: The 'Buy American' provision required that iron, steel, and manufactured goods used in public building or public works projects funded by the stimulus package must be produced in the United States. This was a protectionist measure intended to support domestic industries.

What did President Obama realize about 'shovel-ready' projects by 2010?

Answer: They were not as straightforward to implement as initially believed.

By 2010, President Obama acknowledged that 'shovel-ready' infrastructure projects proved more complex and less straightforward to implement than initially projected.

Related Concepts:

  • What realization did President Obama have regarding 'shovel-ready' projects?: By 2010, President Obama acknowledged that the concept of 'shovel-ready' projects, which were intended to quickly generate jobs through infrastructure spending, was not as straightforward as initially believed. He stated, 'there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects,' reflecting the delays encountered in implementing many infrastructure initiatives.

What was the ARRA's provision for weatherizing homes?

Answer: $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes.

The ARRA included $5 billion specifically for weatherizing modest-income homes as part of its energy efficiency initiatives.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's provision for weatherizing homes?: The ARRA included $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes as part of its energy efficiency initiatives. This aimed to reduce energy consumption and costs for low-income households.
  • How did the ARRA support energy infrastructure and efficiency initiatives?: The ARRA invested $21.5 billion in energy infrastructure, including $6 billion for cleanup of radioactive waste and $4.5 billion for modernizing the electrical grid and smart grid technology. It also allocated $27.2 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment, such as weatherizing homes and supporting renewable energy loan guarantees.

How much funding was allocated for communications, information, and security technologies under the ARRA?

Answer: $10.5 billion

The ARRA allocated $10.5 billion towards communications, information, and security technologies, supporting broadband expansion and government IT upgrades.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the total allocation for communications, information, and security technologies?: The ARRA allocated $10.5 billion towards communications, information, and security technologies. This included significant funding for broadband and wireless internet access expansion, as well as upgrades to various government IT systems and security technologies.

ARRA: Economic Impact and Analysis

Economists like Paul Krugman and Larry Summers recommended a stimulus package smaller than the ARRA.

Answer: False

Economists such as Paul Krugman and Larry Summers, along with others like Martin Feldstein, generally favored a larger economic stimulus package than what was ultimately enacted.

Related Concepts:

  • What did economists like Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Paul Krugman recommend regarding the ARRA?: Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Nobel laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman generally favored a larger economic stimulus than what was enacted. Feldstein expressed concern that the ARRA needed revision to more directly address consumer spending and unemployment, while Krugman felt the plan was too small and politically compromised.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) initially projected that the ARRA would decrease GDP by the end of 2009.

Answer: False

The CBO initially projected that the ARRA would increase GDP by 1.4% to 3.8% by the end of 2009, not decrease it.

Related Concepts:

  • What were the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) initial projections for the ARRA's impact on GDP and employment?: The CBO initially projected that the ARRA would increase GDP by 1.4% to 3.8% by the end of 2009 and boost employment by 0.8 million to 2.3 million people by the end of 2009. These positive impacts were expected to continue, though gradually decrease, through 2011.
  • What did the CBO estimate about the ARRA's impact on GDP and employment in its February 4, 2009 report?: The CBO's February 4, 2009 report projected that while the stimulus would increase economic output and employment in the short run, the GDP would see a net decrease of 0.1% to 0.3% by 2019 compared to the baseline estimate, primarily due to increased national debt.

The CBO projected that by 2019, the ARRA would lead to a net decrease in GDP due to 'crowding out' effects.

Answer: True

The CBO projected that by 2019, the ARRA would result in a net decrease in GDP of 0.1% to 0.3% due to 'crowding out' effects stemming from increased national debt.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO estimate regarding the ARRA's long-term impact on GDP and the federal budget deficit?: The CBO estimated that by 2019, the ARRA would lead to a net decrease in GDP of 0.1% to 0.3% due to 'crowding out' effects from increased national debt. It also projected that the Act would increase federal budget deficits by $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

The CBO's final analysis in 2015 concluded that the ARRA significantly reduced the unemployment rate.

Answer: True

The CBO's final analysis in February 2015 concluded that the ARRA had reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 conclude about the ARRA's effects?: The CBO's final analysis found that over six years, the ARRA boosted real GDP by an average of 1.7% to 9.2%, reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points, and increased full-time equivalent employment-years by 2.1 million to 11.6 million. Total outlays for the program were $663 billion.

Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimated that the ARRA saved or created approximately 5 million jobs one year after enactment.

Answer: False

Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimated that the ARRA saved or created between 1.6 to 1.8 million jobs one year after enactment, forecasting a total impact of 2.5 million jobs upon full implementation.

Related Concepts:

  • What did Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimate regarding job creation from the ARRA one year after its enactment?: One year after the ARRA's enactment, independent macroeconomic firms like Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimated that the stimulus had saved or created between 1.6 to 1.8 million jobs. They forecast a total impact of 2.5 million jobs saved by the time the stimulus measures were fully implemented.

The White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) estimated in July 2010 that the ARRA had saved or created between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs.

Answer: True

In July 2010, the CEA estimated that the ARRA had saved or created between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs by the second quarter of 2010.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) estimate in July 2010 regarding the ARRA's job impact?: In July 2010, the CEA estimated that the ARRA had saved or created between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs as of the second quarter of 2010. At that time, stimulus spending outlays totaled $257 billion, and tax cuts amounted to $223 billion.

Critics calculated the ARRA cost between $185,000 to $278,000 per job created, not accounting for infrastructure benefits.

Answer: True

Critics calculated the cost per job created by the ARRA to be between $185,000 and $278,000, a figure that did not incorporate the long-term benefits derived from infrastructure and other investments.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the estimated cost per job created according to critics' calculations of the ARRA?: Using a direct mathematical calculation based on the total spending and estimated job creation, critics reported that the ARRA cost taxpayers between $185,000 to $278,000 per job created. However, this calculation did not account for the permanent infrastructure and other benefits resulting from the investments.

The CBO reported in November 2011 that the ARRA's employment effects had significantly increased throughout 2011.

Answer: False

The CBO reported in November 2011 that the ARRA's employment effects began to wane at the end of 2010 and continued to do so throughout 2011.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO report in November 2011 regarding the ARRA's employment effects?: In November 2011, the CBO updated its reports, stating that the employment effects of the ARRA began to wane at the end of 2010 and continued to do so throughout 2011. Nevertheless, in the third quarter of 2011, the CBO estimated the Act had increased full-time equivalent jobs by 0.5 million to 3.3 million.

A 2013 study by the Reason Foundation found that a majority of companies receiving ARRA funding hired new workers and retained them.

Answer: False

A 2013 Reason Foundation study found that only 23% of companies receiving ARRA funding hired new workers and retained all of them, with 30% laying off all hired workers once funding ceased.

Related Concepts:

  • What did a 2013 study by the Reason Foundation find regarding ARRA-funded job retention?: A 2013 study by the Reason Foundation surveyed companies that received ARRA funding and found that only 23% hired new workers and retained all of them after the project concluded. Furthermore, only 41% of sampled companies hired any workers at all, and 30% laid off all hired workers once government funding ceased, casting doubt on earlier job creation estimates.

The CBO estimated the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

Answer: True

The CBO estimated that the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by a total of $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's impact on the federal budget deficit according to the CBO?: The CBO estimated that the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion in the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $399 billion in 2010, and by $134 billion in 2011, totaling $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.
  • What did the CBO estimate regarding the ARRA's long-term impact on GDP and the federal budget deficit?: The CBO estimated that by 2019, the ARRA would lead to a net decrease in GDP of 0.1% to 0.3% due to 'crowding out' effects from increased national debt. It also projected that the Act would increase federal budget deficits by $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

The CBO's final analysis in February 2015 reported total outlays for the ARRA were $663 billion, including $97 billion in refundable tax credits.

Answer: True

The CBO's final analysis indicated that total outlays for the ARRA over six years amounted to $663 billion, of which $97 billion comprised refundable tax credits.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 find regarding the ARRA's total outlays?: The CBO's final analysis reported that during the six years of the ARRA's impact, total outlays were $663 billion. Of this amount, $97 billion consisted of refundable tax credits.
  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 conclude about the ARRA's effects?: The CBO's final analysis found that over six years, the ARRA boosted real GDP by an average of 1.7% to 9.2%, reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points, and increased full-time equivalent employment-years by 2.1 million to 11.6 million. Total outlays for the program were $663 billion.

Which economists, cited in the source, generally favored a larger stimulus than what was enacted?

Answer: Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Paul Krugman

Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Paul Krugman advocated for a stimulus package larger than the ARRA, expressing concerns about its scope and potential impact.

Related Concepts:

  • What did economists like Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Paul Krugman recommend regarding the ARRA?: Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Larry Summers, and Nobel laureates Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman generally favored a larger economic stimulus than what was enacted. Feldstein expressed concern that the ARRA needed revision to more directly address consumer spending and unemployment, while Krugman felt the plan was too small and politically compromised.

What did the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) initially project the ARRA's impact on employment by the end of 2009?

Answer: An increase of 0.8 million to 2.3 million jobs

The CBO initially projected that the ARRA would increase employment by 0.8 million to 2.3 million jobs by the end of 2009.

Related Concepts:

  • What were the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) initial projections for the ARRA's impact on GDP and employment?: The CBO initially projected that the ARRA would increase GDP by 1.4% to 3.8% by the end of 2009 and boost employment by 0.8 million to 2.3 million people by the end of 2009. These positive impacts were expected to continue, though gradually decrease, through 2011.
  • What did the CBO estimate about the ARRA's impact on GDP and employment in its February 4, 2009 report?: The CBO's February 4, 2009 report projected that while the stimulus would increase economic output and employment in the short run, the GDP would see a net decrease of 0.1% to 0.3% by 2019 compared to the baseline estimate, primarily due to increased national debt.

According to the CBO's final analysis in February 2015, what was the estimated impact of the ARRA on the unemployment rate?

Answer: It reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points.

The CBO's final analysis in February 2015 estimated that the ARRA reduced the unemployment rate by a range of 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 conclude about the ARRA's effects?: The CBO's final analysis found that over six years, the ARRA boosted real GDP by an average of 1.7% to 9.2%, reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points, and increased full-time equivalent employment-years by 2.1 million to 11.6 million. Total outlays for the program were $663 billion.

What justification did the Obama administration offer for unemployment rates exceeding initial forecasts after the ARRA's passage?

Answer: The recession was more severe than initially projected.

The Obama administration justified higher-than-forecasted unemployment rates by arguing that the recession's severity surpassed initial projections made during the ARRA's drafting.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the Obama administration's justification for the discrepancy between projected and actual unemployment rates after the ARRA's passage?: Supporters of the ARRA argued that the actual recession was more severe than initially projected when the stimulus package was drafted. This greater severity, they contended, accounted for why the unemployment rate exceeded initial forecasts, even with the stimulus in place.

What did Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimate as the total job impact of the ARRA once fully implemented?

Answer: 2.5 million jobs

Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimated that the ARRA would save or create a total of 2.5 million jobs upon its full implementation.

Related Concepts:

  • What did Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimate regarding job creation from the ARRA one year after its enactment?: One year after the ARRA's enactment, independent macroeconomic firms like Moody's and IHS Global Insight estimated that the stimulus had saved or created between 1.6 to 1.8 million jobs. They forecast a total impact of 2.5 million jobs saved by the time the stimulus measures were fully implemented.

What was the estimated cost per job created according to critics' calculations of the ARRA, excluding infrastructure benefits?

Answer: $185,000 - $278,000

Critics calculated the cost per job created by the ARRA to range from $185,000 to $278,000, a figure that did not account for the broader infrastructure and other benefits derived from the investments.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the estimated cost per job created according to critics' calculations of the ARRA?: Using a direct mathematical calculation based on the total spending and estimated job creation, critics reported that the ARRA cost taxpayers between $185,000 to $278,000 per job created. However, this calculation did not account for the permanent infrastructure and other benefits resulting from the investments.

What did the CBO report in November 2011 regarding the ARRA's employment effects?

Answer: The effects began to wane at the end of 2010 and continued to do so.

The CBO reported in November 2011 that the employment effects of the ARRA started to diminish at the close of 2010 and continued this trend throughout 2011.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO report in November 2011 regarding the ARRA's employment effects?: In November 2011, the CBO updated its reports, stating that the employment effects of the ARRA began to wane at the end of 2010 and continued to do so throughout 2011. Nevertheless, in the third quarter of 2011, the CBO estimated the Act had increased full-time equivalent jobs by 0.5 million to 3.3 million.

What did a 2013 study by the Reason Foundation find regarding companies that received ARRA funding?

Answer: Only 23% hired new workers and retained all of them.

A 2013 study by the Reason Foundation indicated that only 23% of companies receiving ARRA funding successfully hired new workers and retained them, with a significant portion laying off all hired workers after funding ceased.

Related Concepts:

  • What did a 2013 study by the Reason Foundation find regarding ARRA-funded job retention?: A 2013 study by the Reason Foundation surveyed companies that received ARRA funding and found that only 23% hired new workers and retained all of them after the project concluded. Furthermore, only 41% of sampled companies hired any workers at all, and 30% laid off all hired workers once government funding ceased, casting doubt on earlier job creation estimates.

What was the CBO's estimate for the ARRA's impact on federal budget deficits over the 2009-2019 period?

Answer: An increase of $787 billion

The CBO estimated that the ARRA would contribute to an increase in federal budget deficits by $787 billion over the period from 2009 to 2019.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the ARRA's impact on the federal budget deficit according to the CBO?: The CBO estimated that the ARRA would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion in the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $399 billion in 2010, and by $134 billion in 2011, totaling $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.
  • What did the CBO estimate regarding the ARRA's long-term impact on GDP and the federal budget deficit?: The CBO estimated that by 2019, the ARRA would lead to a net decrease in GDP of 0.1% to 0.3% due to 'crowding out' effects from increased national debt. It also projected that the Act would increase federal budget deficits by $787 billion over the 2009-2019 period.

What total amount did the CBO report as ARRA outlays over the six years of its impact?

Answer: $663 billion

The CBO's final analysis reported total outlays for the ARRA over six years to be $663 billion.

Related Concepts:

  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 conclude about the ARRA's effects?: The CBO's final analysis found that over six years, the ARRA boosted real GDP by an average of 1.7% to 9.2%, reduced the unemployment rate by 1.1 to 4.8 percentage points, and increased full-time equivalent employment-years by 2.1 million to 11.6 million. Total outlays for the program were $663 billion.
  • What did the CBO's final analysis in February 2015 find regarding the ARRA's total outlays?: The CBO's final analysis reported that during the six years of the ARRA's impact, total outlays were $663 billion. Of this amount, $97 billion consisted of refundable tax credits.

ARRA: Oversight, Transparency, and Criticisms

Recovery.gov was designed to provide transparency by tracking stimulus money spending.

Answer: True

Recovery.gov was established as the official website for the ARRA, intended to offer transparency by enabling taxpayers to track the allocation and expenditure of stimulus funds.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the stated purpose of Recovery.gov, and what criticisms did it face?: Recovery.gov was created as the official website for the ARRA to provide unprecedented transparency, allowing taxpayers to track how the stimulus money was being spent. However, early criticisms noted that the site offered little detail beyond news releases and complex spreadsheets, contrasting with privately run sites that provided more accessible information.

Early criticisms of Recovery.gov noted it offered more detailed project information than privately run sites.

Answer: False

Early criticisms of Recovery.gov indicated that it provided limited detail, often consisting of news releases and complex spreadsheets, in contrast to more accessible information found on privately managed websites.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the stated purpose of Recovery.gov, and what criticisms did it face?: Recovery.gov was created as the official website for the ARRA to provide unprecedented transparency, allowing taxpayers to track how the stimulus money was being spent. However, early criticisms noted that the site offered little detail beyond news releases and complex spreadsheets, contrasting with privately run sites that provided more accessible information.
  • What were some of the reported issues with the Recovery.gov website?: Reports emerged about errors on the Recovery.gov website, including claims of fund distribution to non-existent congressional districts. Additionally, a controversy arose from a Drudge Report allegation about USDA contracts for small quantities of food, which the USDA clarified was a misrepresentation of bulk purchasing data.

Vice President Joe Biden led the oversight of the ARRA's implementation through a high-level advisory board.

Answer: True

Vice President Joe Biden chaired the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, tasked with overseeing the implementation and effectiveness of the ARRA.

Related Concepts:

  • What role did Vice President Joe Biden and Earl Devaney play in the ARRA's oversight?: Vice President Biden led a high-level advisory body, the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, to oversee the stimulus's implementation. Earl Devaney, as Inspector General of the Department of the Interior, was appointed to head the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB) to monitor fund allocation and prevent fraud and waste.

Senator Orrin Hatch launched an inquiry into ARRA-funded green energy grants in 2016.

Answer: True

In May 2016, Senator Orrin Hatch initiated an inquiry into ARRA grants awarded to green energy companies, sending questions to the IRS and Treasury Department.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the outcome of Senator Orrin Hatch's investigation into green energy grants funded by the ARRA?: In May 2016, Senator Orrin Hatch launched an inquiry into the ARRA's grants for solar and green energy companies by sending questions to the IRS and Treasury Department. Such letters from senior senators often initiate formal congressional investigations.

Senators Coburn and McCain criticized the ARRA for not maximizing job creation for the money spent, highlighting wasteful projects.

Answer: True

Senators Tom Coburn and John McCain released a report in August 2010 identifying numerous ARRA projects they deemed wasteful and criticized the stimulus for not maximizing job creation relative to its expenditure.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the criticism leveled by Senators Tom Coburn and John McCain regarding ARRA projects?: In August 2010, Senators Coburn and McCain released a report highlighting 100 projects they deemed wasteful, totaling about $15 billion (less than 2% of the total stimulus). While acknowledging the stimulus had a positive economic effect, they criticized it for not maximizing job creation for the money spent.

What criticism did early reports highlight regarding the Recovery.gov website?

Answer: It offered little detail beyond news releases and complex spreadsheets.

Early reports on Recovery.gov indicated that it provided limited information, primarily consisting of news releases and complex spreadsheets, rather than detailed project data.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the stated purpose of Recovery.gov, and what criticisms did it face?: Recovery.gov was created as the official website for the ARRA to provide unprecedented transparency, allowing taxpayers to track how the stimulus money was being spent. However, early criticisms noted that the site offered little detail beyond news releases and complex spreadsheets, contrasting with privately run sites that provided more accessible information.
  • What were some of the reported issues with the Recovery.gov website?: Reports emerged about errors on the Recovery.gov website, including claims of fund distribution to non-existent congressional districts. Additionally, a controversy arose from a Drudge Report allegation about USDA contracts for small quantities of food, which the USDA clarified was a misrepresentation of bulk purchasing data.

Who was appointed to head the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB) to monitor ARRA fund allocation?

Answer: Earl Devaney

Earl Devaney was appointed to lead the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB), responsible for monitoring the allocation of ARRA funds and preventing fraud.

Related Concepts:

  • What role did Vice President Joe Biden and Earl Devaney play in the ARRA's oversight?: Vice President Biden led a high-level advisory body, the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, to oversee the stimulus's implementation. Earl Devaney, as Inspector General of the Department of the Interior, was appointed to head the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB) to monitor fund allocation and prevent fraud and waste.

What criticism did Senators Coburn and McCain level against ARRA projects in their August 2010 report?

Answer: The projects did not create enough jobs for the money spent.

Senators Coburn and McCain criticized ARRA projects for not maximizing job creation relative to the funds expended, highlighting concerns about efficiency and value for money.

Related Concepts:

  • What was the criticism leveled by Senators Tom Coburn and John McCain regarding ARRA projects?: In August 2010, Senators Coburn and McCain released a report highlighting 100 projects they deemed wasteful, totaling about $15 billion (less than 2% of the total stimulus). While acknowledging the stimulus had a positive economic effect, they criticized it for not maximizing job creation for the money spent.

Home | Sitemaps | Contact | Terms | Privacy