A year ago, Congress enacted a massive bill intended to jolt the economy out of recession. With an official ten-year price tag of $787 billion (recently revised upwards to $862 billion by the Congressional Budget Office), the White House claimed it would save or create 3.7 million jobs. Unfortunately, the reality has been quite disappointing.

As my colleague Allan Meltzer has described, the economic concept of "jobs saved" is pure foolishness. He writes, "One can search economic textbooks forever without finding a concept called ‘jobs saved.' It doesn't exist for good reason: How can anyone know that his or her job has been saved?"

Most of the spending during fiscal 2009 favored policies that don't create jobs rather than those that might.

As I have argued previously, the stimulus package passed last February will end up costing at least $150 billion per year in perpetuity. In addition, compared to Congress's initial expectations for the package, most of the spending during fiscal 2009 favored policies that don't create jobs (such as grants for college and unemployment benefits) rather than those that might (e.g., construction projects). Furthermore, among the $499 billion in spending contained in the bill (the rest being tax cuts), 77 percent was unspent after the first fiscal year that came to an end last October. And, finally, while the White House and CBO both projected that the stimulus bill will keep the unemployment rate below 8 percent, the U.S. economy has seen two months of double-digit unemployment and a net job loss of 4.4 million since enactment of the bill.

Now a new poll indicates that Americans are acutely aware of the failure of this legislation to have any meaningful impact on the economy. According to a recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, "63 percent of the public thinks that projects in the plan were included for purely political reasons and will have no economic benefit, with 36 percent saying those projects will benefit the economy." Additionally, 74 percent of respondents believed at least half of the money had been wasted and 21 percent of respondents believed nearly all the money spent so far has been wasted. Perhaps those polled had in mind the fact that the bill spends money on such things as water pipelines for unprofitable golf courses, a program for Martha's Vineyard residents to have their home appliances controlled from a remote location, and "socially-conscious puppet shows" in Minnesota.

The stimulus bill spends money on such things as water pipelines for unprofitable golf courses, a program for Martha's Vineyard residents to have their home appliances controlled from a remote location, and ‘socially-conscious puppet shows’ in Minnesota.

And many Americans who oppose the bill didn't come to this view after waiting and watching. According to CNN, 44 percent opposed it less than a month after it was enacted. That number has now climbed to 56 percent. And so it appears that many Americans are good economists. They understand that federal spending policies that waste money, trickle into the economy too slowly, and lead to chronic deficits are not an effective stimulus.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress refuse to acknowledge the failure of the stimulus package and are moving full speed ahead toward passing another "jobs bill." In his State of the Union address, President Obama promised job creation policies such as a plan to provide small businesses with tax breaks for new hires. However, more unemployment benefits, costly COBRA health benefit subsidies, and perhaps a raise for doctors seeing Medicare patients will likely be high on the congressional agenda in the weeks ahead.

In fact, Congress has already been at work on the next attempt at stimulus. The House version of the second package, passed in December along party lines, would cost $154 billion. The Senate is considering a smaller bill with a price tag of $80 billion so that they can claim to be more "fiscally conscious." But when an $800 billion government spending plan can't right the economy, Democrats may be walking into another political buzz saw by trying to sell the voters on the idea that a skinnier reprise on "stimulus" will create jobs and growth. All indications now are that the economic intuition of the voter is alive and well, but not very satisfied with Washington.

Alex Brill is a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

FURTHER READING: Among Brill’s many articles for The American, “A Fat Tax That’s Hard to Swallow,” co-authored by Aparna Mathur, criticizes a congressional proposal to tax sugary drinks. “Hitting the Sick in the Wallet” shows how taxes and other provisions in the healthcare overhaul legislation will inflict the sick and the elderly with higher prices. Brill also wrote “About That Stimulus: The Shovel Wasn’t Ready” with Rachel Forward, outlining the administrative red tape choking stimulus spending. Brill also examined government spending in "The Stimulus Bill" and "A Sickening Deficit."

Image by Darren Wamboldt/Bergman Group.