We’ve spent a lot of time considering what should be included in any stimulus package passed by the new Congress. Yesterday, the first version of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009—penned by House Democrats and the president-elect’s team—was made public. The good news is that a lot of the projects that we’ve advocated for are included. The bad news is that the scope of the bill may not match the economic problems we face.

What is included?

- An $87 billion temporary increase in the Medicaid matching rate, which will help states make payments to hospitals, nursing homes and other medical providers.

- Lots of money for education, including $41 billion to local school districts, $79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cutbacks to key services, and $15.6 billion to increase the Pell grant by $500.

- A $20 billion expansion of the food stamp program.

- Just over $90 billion for infrastructure spending including highway construction ($30 billion); green infrastructure modernization ($31 billion); clean water, flood control, and environmental restoration investments ($19 billion); and transit and rail funding ($10 billion).

- And finally, $275 billion in tax cuts for families and businesses.

The full summary is extremely detailed, which indicates that the Obama administration is not going to give state governments a lot of leeway on how they spend their federal assistance. From TPM’s Elana Schor:

As [House Appropriations Committee chairman David] Obey [D-WI] explained, this complexity is in part to avoid anxiety over giving huge amounts of cash to state governors to spend as they see fit (read: Rod Blagojevich). The total amount being given to state and local governments, including non-profits receiving grants, is $318 billion.

Obey also seemed to signal that he doesn’t think the stimulus is robust enough:

Later in the briefing, Obey got more candid. “I believe this [bill] may in fact under-shoot the mark” for economic recovery, he admitted.

David Sirota (who used to work for Obey) is pushing the progressive movement to demand more. For instance, he’s arguing that the infrastructure investment on mass transit is way too small given the deficiencies in the nation’s system.

While tax cuts still take up a large chunk of the money (despite providing limited bank for the buck), House leaders appear serious about slimming down this portion of the package in order to allow for more direct spending.

And let’s not forget that just last week Obama told CNBC that his strategy is to roll out a stimulus bill that falls at the low end of the spectrum, knowing full well that Congress will likely build on it:

“We’ve seen ranges from $800 (billion) to $1.3 trillion,” he said in an exclusive interview with CNBC’s chief Washington correspondent John Harwood. “And our attitude was that given the legislative process, if we start towards the low end of that, we’ll see how it develops.”

Hopefully, congressional leaders like Obey won’t just gripe to reporters about how the package may fall short and will work to improve it.