Not your father's stimulus

THE LIST of supplicants for a piece of the federal government's massive stimulus proposal grows longer by the day. Every interest group from arts organizations to social workers seem to be making the claim that their industries would stimulate the economy if only they got a boost. State governments, which will be distributing the federal largesse, need a plan that gets people working as soon as possible and also invests in the future.

Governor Patrick last week unveiled a $4.7 billion wish list of construction projects he said are "shovel-ready," that is, able to get underway within six months. The good news is that $548 million of the total is for green energy and conservation projects, and $425 million would go to build a technology infrastructure of broadband and wireless capabilities across the state.

Spending on such projects not only creates immediate new jobs but should also boost the state's nascent green industries, not to mention reducing dependence on polluting fossil fuels. The technology infrastructure list includes projects to computerize medical records, long a priority for public health advocates and an important tool to control healthcare costs.

But with megabucks also come mega-opportunities for pork, influence peddling, and political massaging of various constituencies. Patrick admits that he considered "regional equity" among other factors when drawing up his list. Translated, that means mollifying aggrieved Western Massachusetts towns that have long felt the Big Dig sucked all the federal transportation funds into Boston. That may be warranted, but the first priority should be projects that put the most people to work most quickly.

The stimulus plan being debated in Washington is shaping up to include four components: infrastructure spending; a middle-class tax cut; money for education; and relief for "counter-cyclical" costs that go up when the economy declines, such as unemployment benefits, food stamps, and Medicaid. This relief could free up money in the budget for other stalled priorities, such as Patrick's education reform efforts. But state officials must consider the stimulus a one-time infusion of cash and be cautious about baking it into ongoing programs.

Similarly, Patrick is hopeful that the stimulus money can be used for job training. "It's a great opportunity to bring people into the workforce who are chronically unemployed," he said. But the skills training must be tightly connected to new or existing jobs and not generic workshops in resum?? writing. Wisely, Patrick plans to appoint a manager to oversee stimulus spending.

The governors want maximum flexibility to spend the stimulus. But the taxpayers need maximum transparency - and results.