Like Matt Yglesias, I'm pleased but not entirely unsurprised that the cost of the TARP program has once again been revised downward. And I'm certainly inclined to think we need to bolster the labor market and improve job creation, although savvy Democratic political operatives have convinced me that calling any legislative initiative in that direction a "Jobs Bill" would be poor political strategy indeed, if the bill did not immediately produce thousands of jobs the day after it was passed. But this debate over the leftover TARP funding is also one more sign that our legislative system is broken. Last week I asked a high-level economic policy wonk to weigh in on what to do with the TARP remainders -- deficit reduction or employment -- and got a rhetorical slap on the wrist instead. Why? Because, in so many words, it's ludicrous that with 10 percent unemployment, the Democratic Congress can't decide to do more to support the labor market without doing some budgetary sleight of hand and taking the dollars from the TARP fund to avoid making the case for a bill that helps create jobs, and bringing it to a vote. That won't happen because Republicans are just too darn good at procedural obstruction and intimidating moderate Democrats. (Incidentally, deficit-wise, it doesn't really matter whether the money comes from TARP or a separate appropriation, it's all part of the overall budget.) So, sure, spend the remaining TARP funds on jobs, but don't forget that if Congress was effective at producing sound public policy, we wouldn't have to.
-- Tim Fernholz