Word on the street--or, more correctly, the Hill--is that Senator Harry Reid is keeping his fingers crossed for a vote this afternoon on the larger-than-life stimulus bill.

While we still have time, then, it's worthwhile to take another look at what's actually in the thing.  The National Review has compiled 50 examples, including $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, $150 million for the Smithsonian, $448 million for a new Homeland Security headquarters, and $850 million for that model of productivity known as Amtrak. "Other features leap out," they report:  "Of the $4 billion set aside for the Community Oriented Policing Services—COPS—program, half is allocated for communities of fewer than 150,000 people. That's $2 billion to fight nonexistent crime waves in places like Frog Suck, Wyo., and Hoople, N.D."

Whew.  With news that the government already overpaid for bank stocks through the TARP program, one wonders if they'll be able to ram this one through.  Read it, as they say, and weep.

Dan Gilgoff has the interview.

From Christina Romer, Chair of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisors:

Today's report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics is the latest evidence that the U.S. economy is contracting greatly.  Payroll employment declined by 598,000 in January, bringing the total job loss since the recession began in December 2007 to 3.6 million.  This is the largest 13-month job loss since the payroll employment series began in 1939.  The unemployment rate rose from 7.2 to 7.6%, bringing the number of unemployed Americans to 11.6 million.

These numbers, and the very real suffering of American workers they represent, reinforce the need for bold fiscal action.  If we fail to act, we are likely to lose millions more jobs and the unemployment rate could reach double digits.  Prompt, well-designed fiscal policy is necessary to stop the decline and heal the economy.  The American people are counting on leadership from Washington to help the economy recover and lay the long-term foundation for long-term economic growth.

Iceman. Jim Morrison. Batman. New Mexico Governor. When it's all said and done, those could be the highlight roles of actor Val Kilmer's career.

The Associated Press reports:

Fresh from the inauguration, actor Val Kilmer is pondering running for governor in 2010, when Democrat Bill Richardson's second term ends.

"I'm just looking for ways to be contributive," Kilmer told The Associated Press on Thursday. "And if that ends up being where I can make a substantial contribution, then I'll run."

But there's no decision yet.

"It's really day to day," he said over tea at a local restaurant.

Kilmer, 49, grew up in Los Angeles but has called New Mexico home for more than two decades. He's currently registered as a Democrat and said he cast a ballot for Barack Obama from Bulgaria, where he was filming.

"If I run, I'm going to be the next governor," Kilmer said. He'll first have to defeat Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (D), who would have taken over for Bill Richardson had he not withdrawn his nomination for Commerce Secretary, in the Democratic primary.

"I need a bailout." - My nine-year old son explaining to me this morning that his lunch money account at school was overdrawn. How quickly they learn.

In case you missed it, here's a commentary I wrote yesterday for NPR's All Things Considered:

Tuesday would have been a bad day for any administration, let alone a new one trying to get its sea legs while grappling with a host of formidable challenges. But for the Obama administration, which recently proclaimed a "new era of responsibility" and promised to be the most ethical administration in history, it was a public relations disaster.

Within the span of just a few hours Tuesday morning, President Obama saw two of his high-profile picks — HHS nominee Tom Daschle and performance czar Nancy Killefer — withdraw for issues related to tax delinquency. The stunning fall of Daschle comes after Timothy Geithner, the man Obama singled out to run the Treasury Department, was confirmed by the Senate after equally embarrassing revelations that he failed to pay some $35,000 in taxes.

"The president has confidence in the process," press secretary Robert Gibbs said at Tuesday's briefing after being peppered with questions about how the administration missed such glaring problems and whether we'd see more mistakes or surprises. It's a good thing someone still has confidence in the process, because the rest of us are starting to wonder.

Obama spent most of Tuesday afternoon doing a series of previously scheduled network TV interviews that turned into a parade of presidential mea culpas. The president took responsibility for the Daschle debacle, calling it a "mistake" and an "embarrassment."

"I don't want to send a message to the American people that there are two sets of standards," President Obama told CNN's Anderson Cooper, "one for powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes."

Fair enough. But why, then, did Obama wholeheartedly support Daschle for days after the tax issue became public instead of asking him to withdraw immediately? And hasn't Obama already sent a message to the public that there are "two sets of standards" by supporting a new Treasury secretary who is no less guilty than Daschle for failing to live up to his tax obligations?

These questions aren't easily answered — which is why they are a headache for the president and why they appear to have already taken a toll on his honeymoon.

Two weeks ago Obama was basking in the glow of his inauguration as the country's first African-American president. Two weeks later, the president who promised to bring change and a new kind of politics to the nation's capital finds himself supporting and defending Washington insiders who have made "mistakes" on their taxes and creating loopholes in his own shiny new ethics rules so certain lobbyists can work in his administration.

It's no wonder we're now starting to see even some Obama supporters questioning whether this is the kind of "change we can believe in." The president remains enormously popular. But his popularity depends on his ability to live up to the sky-high expectations that he set for himself with his rhetoric and his promises during the campaign.

It will be an ongoing fight for President Obama to meet those expectations. On Tuesday, at least, it was a fight the president lost.

The disgraced former mayor of Detroit got out of prison yesterday, boarded a private chartered jet and flew to his new home in Southlake, Texas, recently ranked by Forbes.com as the “the most affluent neighborhood in the country.”

"Two weeks into the Obama presidency, we like his campaign better than his administration." - The Charlotte Observer editorial page.

Was Times Select just a few years before its time? NYT Executive Editor Bill Keller says the paper is having a "deadly serious" discussion about ways to start charging its readers for content.

One of the reasons Times Select failed, of course, is because people could find plenty of free content elsewhere and the vast majority found they could easily live without reading the opinions of Maureen Dowd, Bob Herbert, Paul Krugman and the rest of the Times's opinion columnists.

Won't the same thing happen if the Times tries to start charging again for content, whether it's a subscription fee or even per article micro-fee? The answer is probably yes.

Which is why Tim Rutten of the LA Times argues that the only way for newspapers to reverse the slide and shock web consumers out of the deeply conditioned view that all content on the web should be free, is for the government to grant major media outlets an antitrust exemption. This would allow most of the webs largest content-producing outlets (including the NYT, cable web sites like CNN.com, and others) to work together to impose a set pricing structure for content all at once.

I have no idea whether this is doable, whether it would work, or what the unintended consequences might be. But we are rapidly approaching the point where something has to give between the habits of web consumers and the viability of some news outlets.

A new Rasmussen poll finds dwindling support for the economic stimulus bill currently making its way through Congress. By a 45%-34% margin, there is more support for a plan that includes tax cuts only. And 50% say the plan that finally emerges from Congress may end up doing more harm than good.

Now: 37% favor, 43% oppose
1 Week ago: 42% favor, 39% oppose
2 weeks ago: 45% favor, 34% oppose