I don't think I need to even bother expressing to my regular readers my utter disdain for this kind of trough-feeding:
Overall, the article notes "the mayors of all 641 cities [represented by the U.S. Conference of Mayors] are asking for $96.6 billion in federal funds for 15,221 municipal projects." Whole bit here.
Here is my question for supporters of this bailout garbage as an economic stimulus. I understand that in Keynesian economics, government spending has a multiplier effect that causes it give a bigger boost to the economy than private spending (I don't agree, but I understand that people believe this and understand the faulty assumptions that get them to this conclusion).
But under what economic theory are we operating now that says that having the federal government borrow or raise taxes to spend on municipal projects has a greater stimulus effect than having local governments do it? None, of course. What is happening is that a bunch of munipal government weenies are going to Obama and saying "we don't have the credibility, support, and or cajones to raise taxes. You seem to be hot now, can you do it for us?"