Recently, there’s been plenty of talk about Republicans and their refusing to accept money from the stimulus bill that was recently passed. Particularly, they like to focus on Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana governor. See, for example, King Banaian’s blog post: “I asked whether Gov. Pawlenty would join Gov. Jindal et al. in refusing any of the stimulus money.” A commenter notes, “Every governor will be forced to choose between principle and payouts, not just the Republicans.”

Their argument is that you’re taking a principled stand against government spending if you do not accept money that your constituents’ paid for. So even if you’re putting money in, you should demand to receive none, even when your economy is doing terrible and is facing huge deficits.

First of all, I would beg to differ that it is a Republican principle to allow your state to be taxed and then to not receive any benefit from that. I’m sure many Minnesotans would disagree with that so-called principle.

But what exactly is this strong principled stand that “Jindal et al.” have taken against this government spending bill, that so many like King and others are raving about? According to Politico, Jindal is refusing “money specifically targeted at expanding state unemployment insurance coverage,” or $98 million dollars. So Jindal takes $3.7 billion instead of $3.8 billion from the federal government, and this is called a principled stand against government spending by Republicans. Bravo.