>I'm with you on this one - I would kind of favor them not taking the money in the first place rather than later deciding 'oops we took too much so we will benevolently return some smattering to those whose money it was in the first place ... minus what we will give to those who never paid it to begin with so they will vote for us and we can then take it all back ... '
>
>I guess 'Vote for me and I'll cut your taxes' is pretty close to 'Vote for me and I'll give you money' <s> but somehow it just sounds more fiscally honest as the latter implies 'Vote for me and I'll give you somebody else's money'
>
>

I hadn't even realized the election year side of the handout. I was too pi$$ed about the handout in general.

That suddenly makes more (non)sense for the democrats since the handouts will go to people the republicans pretty much ignore, and it was the democratic requirement for the legislation to pass.