The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) (), nicknamed the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Developed in response to the Great Recession, the primary objective of this federal statute was to save existing jobs and create new ones as soon as possible. Other objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most affected by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy.

The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage, later revised to $831 billion between 2009 and 2019. The ARRA's rationale was based on the Keynesian economic theory that, during recessions, the government should offset the decrease in private spending with an increase in public spending in order to save jobs and stop further economic deterioration.

The politics around the stimulus were very contentious, with Republicans criticizing the size of the stimulus. On the right, it spurred the Tea Party movement and may have contributed to Republicans winning the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Not a single Republican member of the House voted for the stimulus, and only three Republican senators voted for it. Most economists have argued that the stimulus was smaller than needed. Surveys of economists show overwhelming agreement that the stimulus reduced unemployment, and that the benefits of the stimulus outweighed the costs.

Legislative history
Both the House and the Senate versions of the bills were primarily written by Democratic congressional committee leaders and their staffs. Because work on the bills started before President Obama officially took office on January 20, 2009, top aides to President-Elect Obama held multiple meetings with committee leaders and staffers. On January 10, 2009, President-Elect Obama's administration released a report that provided a preliminary analysis of the impact to jobs of some of the prototypical recovery packages that were being considered.

House of Representatives assembly

The House version of the bill, , was introduced on January 26, 2009. chairman, and was co-sponsored by nine other Democrats. On January 23, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said that the bill was on track to be presented to President Obama for him to sign into law before February 16, 2009. Although 206 amendments were scheduled for floor votes, they were combined into only 11, which enabled quicker passage of the bill.

On January 28, 2009, the House passed the bill by a 244–188 vote. All but 11 Democrats voted for the bill, but not a single Republican voted in favor: 177 Republicans voted against it, while one Republican did not vote.

Senate
The Senate version of the bill, , was introduced on January 6, 2009, and later substituted as an amendment to the House bill, . It was sponsored by Harry Reid, the Majority Leader, co-sponsored by 16 other Democrats and Joe Lieberman, an independent who caucused with the Democrats.

The Senate then began consideration of the bill starting with the $275 billion tax provisions in the week of February 2, 2009. A significant difference between the House version and the Senate version was the inclusion of a one-year extension of revisions to the alternative minimum tax, which added $70 billion to the bill's total.

Republicans proposed several amendments to the bill directed at increasing the share of tax cuts and downsizing spending as well as decreasing the overall price. President Obama and Senate Democrats hinted that they would be willing to compromise on Republican suggestions to increase infrastructure spending and to double the housing tax credit proposed from $7,500 to $15,000 and expand its application to all home buyers, not just first-time buyers.
Other considered amendments included the Freedom Act of 2009, an amendment proposed by Senate Finance Committee members Maria Cantwell (D) and Orrin Hatch (R) to include tax incentives for plug-in electric vehicles.

The Senate called a special Saturday debate session for February 7 at the urging of President Obama. The Senate voted, 61–36 (with 2 not voting) on February 9 to end debate on the bill and advance it to the Senate floor to vote on the bill itself. On February 10, the Senate voted 61–37 (with one not voting)
All the Democrats voted in favor, but only three Republicans voted in favor (Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, and Arlen Specter). Specter switched to the Democratic Party later in the year. At one point, the Senate bill stood at $838 billion.

Comparison of the House, Senate and Conference versions

Senate Republicans forced a near unprecedented level of changes (near $150 billion) in the House bill, which had more closely followed the Obama plan. A comparison of the $827 billion economic recovery plan drafted by Senate Democrats with an $820 billion version passed by the House and the final $787 billion conference version shows huge shifts within these similar totals. Additional debt costs would add about $350 billion or more over 10 years. Many provisions were set to expire in two years.

The main funding differences between the Senate bill and the House bill were: More funds for health care in the Senate ($153.3 vs $140 billion), renewable energy programs ($74 vs. $39.4 billion), for home buyers tax credit ($35.5 vs. $2.6 billion), new payments to the elderly and a one-year increase in AMT limits. The House had more funds appropriated for education ($143 vs. $119.1 billion), infrastructure ($90.4 vs. $62 billion) and for aid to low income workers and the unemployed ($71.5 vs. $66.5 billion).

Spending (Senate – $552 billion, House – $545 billion)

 Aid to low income workers and the unemployed
 Senate – $47 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through December 31, increased by $25 a week, and provide job training; $16.5 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 12 percent through fiscal 2011 and issue a one-time bonus payment; $3 billion in temporary welfare payments.
 House – Comparable extension of unemployment insurance; $20 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 14 percent; $2.5 billion in temporary welfare payments; $1 billion for home heating subsidies and $1 billion for community action agencies.
 Direct cash payments
 Senate – $17 billion to give one-time $300 payments to recipients of Supplemental Security Income and Social Security, and veterans receiving disability and pensions.
 House – $4 billion to provide a one-time additional Supplemental Security Income and Social Security Disability Insurance payment to the elderly, of $450 for individuals and $630 for married couples.
 Conference – $250 one-time payment to each recipient of Supplemental Security Income, Social Security (Regular & Disability) Insurance, Veterans pension, Railroad Retirement, or State retirement system
 Infrastructure
 Senate – $46 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $11.5 billion for mass transit and rail projects; $4.6 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers; $5 billion for public housing improvements; $6.4 billion for clean and drinking water projects.
 House – $47 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $12 billion for mass transit, including $7.5 billion to buy transit equipment such as buses; and $31 billion to build and repair federal buildings and other public infrastructures.
 Health care
 Senate – $21 billion to subsidize the cost of continuing health care insurance for the involuntarily unemployed under the COBRA program; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $22 billion to modernize health information technology systems; and $10 billion for health research and construction of National Institutes of Health facilities.
 House – $40 billion to subsidize the cost of continuing health care insurance for the involuntarily unemployed under the COBRA program or provide health care through Medicaid; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $20 billion to modernize health information technology systems; $4 billion for preventive care; $1.5 billion for community health centers; $420 million to combat avian flu; $335 million for programs that combat AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis.
 Conference – A 65% COBRA subsidy for 9 months will apply to workers laid off between Sep 1, 2008 and Dec 31, 2009. Those already laid off have 60 days to apply for COBRA.
 Education
 Senate – $55 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cuts in education aid and provide block grants; $25 billion to school districts to fund special education and the No Child Left Behind K–12 law; $14 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $400 to $5,250; $2 billion for Head Start.
 House – Similar aid to states and school districts; $21 billion for school modernization; $16 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $500 to $5,350; $2 billion for Head Start.
 Conference – The Conference Report merged most education aid with the State Fiscal Stabilization fund (administered by the Department of Education) and gave power over the funds to each governor under voluminous restrictions. The Governor is "Required" to spend $45 billion of the money on education to restore funding to 2008 levels but the mechanisms to enforce state maintenance of effort at 2005–06 levels are complex and potentially impossible to implement. Hard hit states such as Nevada cannot possibly find enough funds to get to the 2005–06 state funding levels for education. Some states with no current budget cuts for education, such as Arkansas and North Carolina, may get nothing. This will result in a monumental 50 state legal and political fight over how to re-budget to best take advantage of the federal legislation. Many states will further reduce state funds for education to the 2005–06 minimum so these state resources can be used for other state priorities and the net gain for education will be far less than the total federal appropriation.
 Energy
 Senate – $40 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, including $2.9 billion to weatherize modest-income homes; $4.6 billion for fossil fuel research and development; $6.4 billion to clean up nuclear weapons production sites; $11 billion toward a smart electricity grid to reduce waste; $8.5 billion to subsidize loans for renewable energy projects; and $2 billion for advanced battery systems.
 House – $28.4 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, including $6.2 billion to weatherize homes; $11 billion to fund a smart electricity grid.
 Homeland security
 Senate – $4.7 billion for homeland security programs, including $1 billion for airport screening equipment and $800 million for port security.
 House – $1.1 billion, including $500 million for airport screening equipment.
 Law enforcement
 Senate – $3.5 billion in grants to state and local law enforcement to hire officers and purchase equipment.
 House – Comparable provision.

Tax changes ($275 billion)
 House – About $145 billion for $500 per-worker, $1,000 per-couple tax credits in 2009 and 2010. For the last half of 2009, workers could expect to see about $20 a week less withheld from their paychecks starting around June. Millions of Americans who don't make enough money to pay federal income taxes could file returns next year and receive checks. Individuals making more than $75,000 and couples making more than $150,000 would receive reduced amounts.
 Senate – The credit would phase out at incomes of $70,000 for individuals and couples making more than $140,000 and phase out more quickly, reducing the cost to $140 billion.
 Conference – Tax Credit reduced to $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010 and phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers. Note retirees with no wages get nothing.
 Alternative minimum tax
 House – No provision.
 Senate – About $70 billion to prevent 24 million taxpayers from paying the alternative minimum tax in 2009. The tax was designed to make sure wealthy taxpayers can't use credits and deductions to avoid paying any taxes or paying at a far lower rate than would otherwise be possible. But it was never indexed to inflation, so critics now contend it taxes people it was not intended to. Congress addresses it each year, usually in the fall.
 Conference – Includes a one-year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.
 Expanded child credit
 House – $18.3 billion to give greater access to the $1,000 per-child tax credit for low income workers in 2009 and 2010. Under current law, workers must make at least $12,550 to receive any portion of the credit. The change eliminates the floor, meaning more workers who pay no federal income taxes could receive checks.
 Senate – Sets a new income threshold of $8,100 to receive any portion of the credit, reducing the cost to $7.5 billion.
 Conference – The income floor for refunds was set at $3,000 for 2009 & 2010.
 Expanded earned income tax credit
 House – $4.7 billion to increase the earned income tax credit – which provides money to low income workers – for families with at least three children.
 Senate – Same.
 Expanded college credit
 House – $13.7 billion to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
 Senate – Reduces the amount that can be refunded to low-income families that pay no income taxes, lowering the cost to $13 billion.
 Homebuyer credit
 House – $2.6 billion to repeal a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time for homes purchased from Jan 1 to July 1, unless the home is sold within three years. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $150,000.
 Senate – Doubles the credit to $15,000 for homes purchased for a year after the bill takes effect, increasing the cost to $35.5 billion.
 Conference – $8,000 credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years.
 Home energy credit
 House – $4.3 billion to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
 Senate – Same.
 Conference – Same.
 Unemployment
 House – No similar provision.
 Senate – $4.7 billion to exclude from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
 Conference – Same as Senate
 Bonus depreciation
 House – $5 billion to extend a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.
 Senate – Similar.
 Money-losing companies
 House – $15 billion to allow companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.
 Senate – Allows companies to use more of their losses to offset previous profits, increasing the cost to $19.5 billion.
 Conference – Limits the carry-back to small companies, revenue under $5 million
 Government contractors
 House – Repeal a law that takes effect in 2011, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.
 Senate – Delays the law from taking effect until 2012, reducing the cost to $291 million.
 Energy production
 House – $13 billion to extend tax credits for renewable energy production.
 Senate – Same.
 Conference – Extension is to 2014.
 Repeal bank credit
 House – Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.
 Senate – Same.
 House – $36 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, teacher training, economic development and infrastructure improvements.
 Senate – $22.8 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, industrial development and infrastructure improvements.
 Auto sales
 House – No similar provision.
 Senate – $11 billion to make interest payments on most auto loans and sales tax on cars deductible.
 Conference – $2 billion for deduction of sales tax, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.

Conference report
Congressional negotiators said that they had completed the Conference Report on February 11. On February 12, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer scheduled the vote on the bill for the next day, before wording on the bill's content had been completed and despite House Democrats having previously promised to allow a 48-hour public review period before any vote. The Report with final handwritten provisions was posted on a House website that evening. On February 13, the Report passed the House, 246–183, largely along party lines with all 246 Yes votes given by Democrats and the Nay vote split between 176 Republicans and 7 Democrats.

The Senate passed the bill, 60–38, with all Democrats and Independents voting for the bill along with three Republicans. On February 17, 2009, President Barack Obama signed the Recovery Act into law.

Provisions of the Act

Section 3 of ARRA listed the basic intent behind crafting the law. This Statement of Purpose included the following:
 To preserve and create jobs and promote economic recovery.
 To assist those most impacted by the recession.
 To provide investments needed to increase economic efficiency by spurring technological advances in science and health.
 To invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits.
 To stabilize State and local government budgets, in order to minimize and avoid reductions in essential services and counterproductive state and local tax increases.

The Act specifies that 37% of the package is to be devoted to tax incentives equaling $288 billion and $144 billion, or 18%, is allocated to state and local fiscal relief (more than 90% of the state aid is going to Medicaid and education). The remaining 45%, or $357 billion, is allocated to federal spending programs such as transportation, communication, wastewater, and sewer infrastructure improvements; energy efficiency upgrades in private and federal buildings; extension of federal unemployment benefits; and scientific research programs. The following are details to the different parts of the final bill and the selected citizen to receive this Government Grants have to come up with  $350 for the activation and they must clear the state tax according to the state percentage that will be refund it back along with the Grants.:

Tax incentives for individuals

Total: $237 billion
 $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.
 $70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one-year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.
 $15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).
 $14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
 $6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between January 1, 2009, and December 1, 2009, and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.
 $4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
 $4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit – which provides money to low income workers – for families with at least three children.
 $4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
 $1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.

Tax incentives for companies

Total: $51 billion
 $15 billion: Allowing companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.
 $13 billion: to extend tax credits for renewable energy production (until 2014).
 $11 billion: Government contractors: Repeal a law that takes effect in 2012, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.
 $7 billion: Repeal bank credit: Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.
 $5 billion: Bonus depreciation, which extends a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.

Healthcare

ARRA included the enactment of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, also known as the HITECH Act.

Total health care spending: $155.1 billion
 $86.8 billion for Medicaid
 $25.8 billion for health information technology investments and incentive payments
 $25.1 billion to provide a 65% subsidy of health care insurance premiums for the unemployed under the COBRA program
 $10 billion for health research and construction of National Institutes of Health facilities
 $2 billion for Community Health Centers
 $1.3 billion for construction of military hospitals
 $1.1 billion to study the comparative effectiveness of healthcare treatments
 $1 billion for prevention and wellness
 $1 billion for the Veterans Health Administration
 $500 million for healthcare services on Indian reservations
 $300 million to train healthcare workers in the National Health Service Corps
 $202 million for a temporary moratorium for certain Medicare regulations

Education

Total: $100 billion
 $53.6 billion in aid to local school districts to prevent layoffs and cutbacks, with flexibility to use the funds for school modernization and repair (State Fiscal Stabilization Fund)
 $15.6 billion to increase Pell Grants from $4,731 to $5,350
 $13 billion for low-income public schoolchildren
 $12.2 billion for IDEA special education
 $2.1 billion for Head Start
 $2 billion for childcare services
 $650 million for educational technology
 $300 million for increased teacher salaries
 $250 million for states to analyze student performance
 $200 million to support working college students
 $70 million for the education of homeless children

Aid to low income workers, unemployed and retirees (including job training)

Total: $82.2 billion
 $40 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through December 31, and increase them by $25 a week
 $19.9 billion for the Food Stamp Program
 $14.2 billion to give one-time $250 payments to Social Security recipients, people on Supplemental Security Income, and veterans receiving disability and pensions.
 $3.45 billion for job training
 $3.2 billion in temporary welfare payments (TANF and WIC)
 $500 million for vocational training for the disabled
 $400 million for employment services
 $120 million for subsidized community service jobs for older Americans
 $150 million to help refill food banks
 $100 million for meals programs for seniors, such as Meals on Wheels
 $100 million for free school lunch programs

Infrastructure investment
Total: $105.3 billion

Transportation

Total: $48.1 billion, some in the form of Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grants
 $27.5 billion for highway and bridge construction projects
 $8 billion for intercity passenger rail projects and rail congestion grants, with priority for high-speed rail
 $6.9 billion for new equipment for public transportation projects (Federal Transit Administration)
 $1.5 billion for national surface transportation discretionary grants
 $1.3 billion for Amtrak
 $1.1 billion in grants for airport improvements
 $750 million for the construction of new public rail transportation systems and other fixed guideway systems.
 $750 million for the maintenance of existing public transportation systems
 $200 million for FAA upgrades to air traffic control centers and towers, facilities, and equipment
 $100 million in grants for improvements to domestic shipyards

Water, sewage, environment, and public lands
Total: $18 billion
 $4.6 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers for environmental restoration, flood protection, hydropower, and navigation infrastructure projects
 $4 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund wastewater treatment infrastructure improvements (EPA)
 $2 billion for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund drinking water infrastructure improvements (EPA)
 $1.38 billion for rural drinking water and waste disposal projects
 $1 billion to the Bureau of Reclamation for drinking water projects for rural or drought-likely areas
 $750 million to the National Park Service
 $650 million to the Forest Service
 $600 million for hazardous waste cleanup at Superfund sites (EPA)
 $515 million for wildfire prevention projects
 $500 million for Bureau of Indian Affairs infrastructure projects
 $340 million to the Natural Resources Conservation Service for watershed infrastructure projects
 $320 million to the Bureau of Land Management
 $300 million for reductions in emissions from diesel engines (EPA)
 $300 million to improve Land Ports of Entry (GSA)
 $280 million for National Wildlife Refuges and the National Fish Hatchery System
 $220 million to the International Boundary and Water Commission to repair flood control systems along the Rio Grande
 $200 million for cleanup of leaking Underground Storage Tanks (EPA)
 $100 million for cleaning former industrial and commercial sites (Brownfields) (EPA)

Government buildings and facilities

Total: $7.2 billion
 $4.2 billion to repair and modernize Defense Department facilities.
 $890 million to improve housing for service members
 $750 million for federal buildings and U.S. Courthouses (GSA)
 $250 million to improve Job Corps training facilities
 $240 million for new child development centers
 $240 million for the maintenance of United States Coast Guard facilities
 $200 million for Department of Homeland Security headquarters
 $176 million for Agriculture Research Service repairs and improvements
 $150 million for the construction of state extended-care facilities
 $100 million to improve facilities of the National Guard

Communications, information, and security technologies

Total: $10.5 billion
 $7.2 billion for complete broadband and wireless Internet access
 $1 billion for explosive detection systems for airports
 $500 million to update the computer center at the Social Security Administration
 $420 million for construction and repairs at ports of entry
 $290 million to upgrade IT platforms at the State Department
 $280 million to upgrade border security technologies
 $210 million to build and upgrade fire stations
 $200 million for IT and claims processing improvements for Veterans Benefits Administration
 $150 million to upgrade port security
 $150 million for the security of transit systems
 $50 million for IT improvements at the Farm Service Agency
 $26 million to improve security systems at the Department of Agriculture headquarters

Energy infrastructure
Total: $21.5 billion
 $6 billion for the cleanup of radioactive waste (mostly nuclear weapons production sites)
 $4.5 billion for the Office of Electricity and Energy Reliability to modernize the nation's electrical grid and smart grid.
 $4.5 billion to increase energy efficiency in federal buildings (GSA)
 $3.25 billion for the Western Area Power Administration for power transmission system upgrades.
 $3.25 billion for the Bonneville Power Administration for power transmission system upgrades.

Energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment

Total: $27.2 billion
 $6 billion for renewable energy and electric transmission technologies loan guarantees
 $5 billion for weatherizing modest-income homes
 $3.4 billion for carbon capture and low emission coal research
 $3.2 billion toward Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grants.
 $3.1 billion for the State Energy Program to help states invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy
 $2 billion for manufacturing of advanced car battery (traction) systems and components.
 $800 million for biofuel research, development, and demonstration projects.
 $602 million to support the use of energy efficient technologies in building and in industry
 $500 million for training of green-collar workers (by the Department of Labor)
 $400 million for the Geothermal Technologies Program
 $400 million for electric vehicle technologies
 $300 million for energy efficient appliance rebates
 $300 million for state and local governments to purchase energy efficient vehicles
 $300 million to acquire electric vehicles for the federal vehicle fleet (GSA)
 $250 million to increase energy efficiency in low-income housing
 $204 million in funding for research and testing facilities at national laboratories
 $190 million in funding for wind, hydro, and other renewable energy projects
 $115 million to develop and deploy solar power technologies
 $110 million for the development of high efficiency vehicles
 $42 million in support of new deployments of fuel cell technologies

Housing
Total: $14.7 billion
 $4 billion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for repairing and modernizing public housing, including increasing the energy efficiency of units.
 $2.25 billion in tax credits for financing low-income housing construction
 $2 billion for Section 8 housing rental assistance
 $2 billion for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program to purchase and repair foreclosed vacant housing
 $1.5 billion for rental assistance to prevent homelessness
 $1 billion in community development block grants for state and local governments
 $555 million in mortgage assistance for wounded service members (Army Corps of Engineers)
 $510 million for the rehabilitation of Native American housing
 $250 million for energy efficient modernization of low-income housing
 $200 million for helping rural Americans buy homes (Department of Agriculture)
 $140 million in grants for independent living centers for elderly blind persons (Dept. of Education)
 $130 million for rural community facilities (Department of Agriculture)
 $100 million to help remove lead paint from public housing
 $100 million emergency food and shelter for homeless (Department of Homeland Security)

Scientific research

Total: $7.6 billion
 $3 billion to the National Science Foundation
 $2 billion to the United States Department of Energy
 $1 billion to NASA, including "$400 million for space exploration related activities. Of this amount, $50 million [was] to be used for the development of commercial crew space transportation concepts and enabling capabilities."
 $600 million to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
 $580 million to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, of which $68 million was spent on new major (+$1M) scientific instruments, $200M went to fund major scientific building construction at research universities, and $110M was spent on new buildings and major upgrades to existing facilities, including energy efficiency and solar panel arrays, at the Gaithersburg MD and Boulder CO campuses.
 $230 million for NOAA operations, research and facilities
 $140 million to the United States Geological Survey

Other

Total: $10.6 billion
 $4 billion for state and local law enforcement agencies
 $1.1 billion in waivers on interest payments for state  unemployment trust funds
 $1 billion in preparation for the 2010 census
 $1 billion in added funding for child support enforcement
 $750 million for DTV conversion coupons and DTV transition education
 $749 million in crop insurance reinstatement, and emergency loans for farmers
 $730 million in SBA loans for small businesses
 $500 million for the Social Security Administration to process disability and retirement backlogs
 $201 million in additional funding for AmeriCorps and other community service organizations
 $150 million for Urban and Rural economic recovery programs
 $150 million for an increase of claims processing military staff
 $150 million in loans for rural businesses
 $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts to support artists
 $50 million for the National Cemetery Administration

Buy American provision
ARRA included a protectionist 'Buy American' provision, which imposed a general requirement that any public building or public works project funded by the new stimulus package must use only iron, steel and other manufactured goods produced in the United States.

A May 15, 2009, Washington Post article reported that the 'Buy American' provision of the stimulus package caused outrage in the Canadian business community, and that the government in Canada "retaliated" by enacting its own restrictions on trade with the U.S.  On June 6, 2009, delegates at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference passed a resolution that would potentially shut out U.S. bidders from Canadian city contracts, in order to help show support for Prime Minister Stephen Harper's opposition to the "Buy American" provision. Sherbrooke Mayor Jean Perrault, president of the federation, stated, "This U.S. protectionist policy is hurting Canadian firms, costing Canadian jobs and damaging Canadian efforts to grow in the world-wide recession." On February 16, 2010, the United States and Canada agreed on exempting Canadian companies from Buy American provisions, which would have hurt the Canadian economy.

Recommendations by economists

Economists such as Martin Feldstein, Daron Acemoğlu, National Economic Council director Larry Summers, and Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences winners Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman favored a larger economic stimulus to counter the economic downturn. While in favor of a stimulus package, Feldstein expressed concern over the act as written, saying it needed revision to address consumer spending and unemployment more directly. Just after the bill was enacted, Krugman wrote that the stimulus was too small to deal with the problem, adding, "And it's widely believed that political considerations led to a plan that was weaker and contains more tax cuts than it should have – that Mr. Obama compromised in advance in the hope of gaining broad bipartisan support." Conservative economist John Lott was more critical of the government spending.

On January 28, 2009, a full-page advertisement with the names of approximately 200 economists who were against Obama's plan appeared in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. This included Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences laureates Edward C. Prescott, Vernon L. Smith, and James M. Buchanan. The economists denied the quoted statement by President Obama that there was "no disagreement that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help to jumpstart the economy". Instead, the signers believed that "to improve the economy, policymakers should focus on reforms that remove impediments to work, saving, investment and production. Lower tax rates and a reduction in the burden of government are the best ways of using fiscal policy to boost growth." The funding for this advertisement came from the Cato Institute.

On February 8, 2009, a letter to Congress signed by about 200 economists in favor of the stimulus, written by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, said that Obama's plan "proposes important investments that can start to overcome the nation's damaging loss of jobs", and would "put the United States back onto a sustainable long-term-growth path".  This letter was signed by Nobel Memorial laureates Kenneth Arrow, Lawrence R. Klein, Eric Maskin, Daniel McFadden, Paul Samuelson and Robert Solow. The New York Times published projections from IHS Global Insight, Moodys.com, Economy.com and Macroeconomic Advisers that indicated that the economy may have been worse without the ARRA.

A 2019 study in the American Economic Journal found that the stimulus had a positive impact on the US economy, but that the positive impact would have been greater if the stimulus had been more frontloaded.

Congressional Budget Office reports

The CBO estimated ARRA would positively impact GDP and employment. It projected an increase in the GDP of between 1.4 percent and 3.8 percent by the end of 2009, between 1.1 percent and 3.3 percent by the end of 2010, between 0.4 percent and 1.3 percent by the end of 2011, and a decrease of between zero and 0.2 percent beyond 2014. The impact to employment would be an increase of 0.8 million to 2.3 million by the end of 2009, an increase of 1.2 million to 3.6 million by the end of 2010, an increase of 0.6 million to 1.9 million by the end of 2011, and declining increases in subsequent years as the U.S. labor market reaches nearly full employment, but never negative. Decreases in GDP in 2014 and beyond are accounted for by crowding out, where government debt absorbs finances that would otherwise go toward investment. A 2013 study by economists Stephen Marglin and Peter Spiegler found the stimulus had boosted GDP in line with CBO estimates.

A February 4, 2009, report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said that while the stimulus would increase economic output and employment in the short run, the GDP would, by 2019, have an estimated net decrease between 0.1% and 0.3% (as compared to the CBO estimated baseline).

The CBO estimated that enacting the bill would increase federal budget deficits by $185 billion over the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $399 billion in 2010, and by $134 billion in 2011, or $787 billion over the 2009–2019 period.

In a February 11 letter, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf noted that there was disagreement among economists about the effectiveness of the stimulus, with some skeptical of any significant effects while others expecting very large effects. Elmendorf said the CBO expected short term increases in GDP and employment. In the long term, the CBO expects the legislation to reduce output slightly by increasing the nation's debt and crowding out private investment, but noted that other factors, such as improvements to roads and highways and increased spending for basic research and education may offset the decrease in output and that crowding out was not an issue in the short term because private investment was already decreasing in response to decreased demand.

In February 2015, the CBO released its final analysis of the results of the law, which found that during six years:
 Real GDP was boosted by an average ranging from a low of 1.7% to a high of 9.2%
 The unemployment rate was reduced by an average ranging from a low of 1.1 percentage points to a high of 4.8 percentage points
 Full-time equivalent employment-years was boosted by an average ranging from 2.1 million to 11.6 million
 Total outlays were $663 billion, of which $97 billion were refundable tax credits

Recovery.gov

A May 21, 2009, article in The Washington Post stated, "To build support for the stimulus package, President Obama vowed unprecedented transparency, a big part of which, he said, would be allowing taxpayers to track money to the street level on Recovery.gov..." But three months after the bill was signed, Recovery.gov offers little beyond news releases, general breakdowns of spending, and acronym-laden spreadsheets and timelines." The same article also stated, "Unlike the government site, the privately run Recovery.org is actually providing detailed information about how the $787 billion in stimulus money is being spent."

Reports regarding errors in reporting on the Web site made national news. News stories circulated about Recovery.gov reporting fund distribution to congressional districts that did not exist.

A new Recovery.gov website was redesigned at a cost estimated to be $9.5 million (~$ in ) through January 2010.

On July 20, 2009, the Drudge Report published links to pages on Recovery.gov that Drudge alleged were detailing expensive contracts awarded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for items such as individual portions of mozzarella cheese, frozen ham and canned pork, costing hundreds of thousands to over a million dollars. A statement released by the USDA the same day corrected the allegation, stating that "references to '2 pound frozen ham sliced' are to the sizes of the packaging. Press reports suggesting that the Recovery Act spent $1.191 million to buy "2 pounds of ham" are wrong. In fact, the contract in question purchased 760,000 pounds of ham for $1.191 million, at a cost of approximately $1.50 per pound."

As of 2016, the servers for recovery.gov have been shut down and the site is unavailable.

Developments under the Act and estimates of the Act's effects

The Congressional Budget Office reported in October 2009 the reasons for the changes in the 2008 and 2009 deficits, which were approximately $460 billion and $1.41 trillion, respectively. The CBO estimated that ARRA increased the deficit by $200 billion (~$ in ) for 2009, split evenly between tax cuts and additional spending, excluding any feedback effects on the economy.

On February 12, 2010, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which regularly issues economic reports, published job-loss data on a month-by-month basis since 2000. Organizing for America, a community organizing project of the Democratic National Committee, prepared a chart presenting the BLS data for the period beginning in December 2007. OFA used the chart to argue, "As a result [of the Recovery Act], job losses are a fraction of what they were a year ago, before the Recovery Act began." Others argue that job losses always grow early in a recession and naturally slow down with or without government stimulus spending, and that the OFA chart was misleading.

In the primary justification for the stimulus package, the Obama administration and Democratic proponents presented a graph in January 2009 showing the projected unemployment rate with and without the ARRA. The graph showed that if ARRA was not enacted the unemployment rate would exceed 9%; but if ARRA was enacted it would never exceed 8%. After ARRA became law, the actual unemployment rate exceeded 8% in February 2009, exceeded 9% in May 2009, and exceeded 10% in October 2009. The actual unemployment rate was 9.2% in June 2011 when it was projected to be below 7% with the ARRA. However, supporters of the ARRA claim that this can be accounted for by noting that the actual recession was subsequently revealed to be much worse than any projections at the time when the ARRA was drawn up.

According to a March 2009 Industry Survey of and by the National Association of Business Economists, 60.3% of their economists who had reviewed the fiscal stimulus enacted in February 2009 projected it would have a modest impact in shortening the recession, with 29.4% anticipating little or no impact as well as 10.3% predicting a strong impact. The aspects of the stimulus expected by the NABE to have the greatest effectiveness were physical infrastructure, unemployment benefits expansion, and personal tax-rate cuts.

One year after the stimulus, several independent macroeconomic firms, including Moody's and IHS Global Insight, estimated that the stimulus saved or created 1.6 to 1.8 million jobs and forecast a total impact of 2.5 million jobs saved by the time the stimulus is completed. The Congressional Budget Office considered these estimates conservative. The CBO estimated according to its model 2.1 million jobs saved in the last quarter of 2009, boosting the economy by up to 3.5 percent and lowering the unemployment rate by up to 2.1 percent. The CBO projected that the package would have an even greater impact in 2010. The CBO also said, "It is impossible to determine how many of the reported jobs would have existed in the absence of the stimulus package." The CBO's report on the first quarter of 2010 showed a continued positive effect, with an employment gain in that quarter of up to 2.8 million and a GDP boost of up to 4.2 percent.  Economists Timothy Conley of the University of Western Ontario and Bill Dupor of the Ohio State University found that while the stimulus' effects on public sector job creation were unambiguously positive, the effects on private sector job creation were ambiguous. Economist Dan Wilson of the Federal Reserve, who used similar methodology, without the same identified errors, estimates that "ARRA spending created or saved about 2 million jobs in its first year and over 3 million by March 2011."

The CBO also revised its assessment of the long-term impact of the bill. After 2014, the stimulus is estimated to decrease output by zero to 0.2%. The stimulus is not expected to have a negative impact on employment in any period of time.

In 2011, the Department of Commerce revised some of its previous estimates. Economist Dean Baker commented:

[T]he revised data ... showed that the economy was plunging even more rapidly than we had previously recognised in the two quarters following the collapse of Lehman. Yet, the plunge stopped in the second quarter of 2009 – just as the stimulus came on line. This was followed by respectable growth over the next four quarters. Growth then weakened again as the impact of the stimulus began to fade at the end of 2010 and the start of this year.

In other words, the growth pattern shown by the revised data sure makes it appear that the stimulus worked. The main problem would seem to be that the stimulus was not big enough and it wasn't left in place long enough to lift the economy to anywhere near potential output.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) established a "Hypocrisy Hall of Fame" to list Republican Representatives who had voted against ARRA but who then sought or took credit for ARRA programs in their districts. As of September 2011, the DCCC was listing 128 House Republicans in this category. Newsweek reported that many of the Republican legislators who publicly argued that the stimulus would not create jobs were writing letters seeking stimulus programs for their districts on the grounds that the spending would create jobs.

The stimulus has been criticized as being too small. In July 2010, a group of 40 prominent economists issued a statement calling for expanded stimulus programs to reduce unemployment. They also challenged the view that the priority should be reducing the deficit: "Making deficit reduction the first target, without addressing the chronic underlying deficiency of demand, is exactly the error of the 1930s."

In July 2010, the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) estimated that the stimulus had "saved or created between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs as of the second quarter of 2010".  At that point, spending outlays under the stimulus totaled $257 billion and tax cuts totaled $223 billion. In July 2011, the CEA estimated that as of the first quarter of  2011, the ARRA raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been by between 2.4 and 3.6 million. The sum of outlays and tax cuts up to this point was $666 billion. Using a straight mathematical calculation, critics reported that the ARRA cost taxpayers between $185,000 to $278,000 per job that was created, though this computation does not include the permanent infrastructure that resulted.

In August 2010, Republican Senators Tom Coburn and John McCain released a report listing 100 projects it described as the "most wasteful projects" funded by the Act. In total, the projects questioned by the two senators amounted to about $15 billion, or less than 2% of the $862 billion. The two senators did concede that the stimulus has had a positive effect on the economy, though they criticized it for failing to give "the biggest bang for our buck" on the issue of job creation. CNN noted that the two senators' stated objections were brief summaries presenting selective accounts that were unclear, and the journalists pointed out several instances where they created erroneous impressions.

One of the primary purposes and promises of the Act was to launch a large number of "shovel ready" projects that would generate jobs. However, a sizable number of these projects, most of which pertained to infrastructure, took longer to implement than they had expected by most.  By 2010, Obama said he had come to realize 'there's no such thing as shovel-ready projects.'

Some of the tax incentives in the Act, including those related to the American opportunity tax credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, were extended for a further two years by the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.

In November 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) updated its earlier reports concerning the Act. The CBO stated that "the employment effects began to wane at the end of 2010 and have continued to do so throughout 2011."  Nevertheless, in the third quarter of 2011, the CBO estimated that the Act had increased the number of full-time equivalent jobs by 0.5 million to 3.3 million. Section 1513 of the Recovery Act stated that reports on the impact of the act were to be submitted quarterly, however the last report issued occurred for the second quarter of 2011. As of December 2012, 58.6% of Americans are employed.

In 2013, the Reason Foundation, an American libertarian group, conducted a study of the results of the ARRA. Only 23% of the 8,381 sampled companies hired new workers and kept all of them when the project was completed. Also, just 41% of sampled companies hired workers at all, while 30% of sampled companies did hire but laid off all workers once the government money stopped funding. These results cast doubt on previously stated estimates of job creation numbers, which do not factor those companies that did not retain their workers or hire any at all.

In February 2014, the White House stated in a release that the stimulus measure saved or created an average of 1.6 million jobs a year between 2009 and 2012, thus averting having the recession descend into another Great Depression. Republicans, such as House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, criticized the report since, in their views, the Act cost too much for too little result.

Oversight and administration
In addition to the Vice President Biden's oversight role, a high-level advisory body, the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board (later renamed and reconstituted as the "President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness"), was named concurrent to the passage of the act.

As well, the President named Inspector General of the United States Department of the Interior Earl Devaney and the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB) to monitor administration of the Act, and prevent low levels of fraud, waste and loss in fund allocation. Eleven other inspectors general served on the RATB, and the board also had a Recovery Independent Advisory Panel.

In late 2011, Devaney and his fellow inspectors general on RATB, and more who were not, were credited with avoiding any major scandals in the administration of the Act, in the eyes of one Washington observer.

In May 2016, the chairman of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), launched the first steps of an investigation into a part of the stimulus law that gave grants to solar and green energy companies. Hatch sent a letter to the IRS and Treasury Department with a list of questions about the program. According to the Wall Street Journal, letters from senior senators who chair committees can lead to formal investigations by Congress.

One part of the stimulus law, Section 1603, gave cash grants to solar companies to encourage investment in solar technology. Because many companies didn't yet make a profit in 2009 in that industry, they were offered cash instead of tax credits. In September 2015, the U.S. government asked that a Spanish company return $1 million (~$ in ) it had received from the program. The company issued a statement saying it fully complied with the request.

See also

 Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998
 Financial crisis of 2007–2008
 Economic Stimulus Act of 2008
 2009 energy efficiency and renewable energy research investment
 2010 United States federal budget
 Build America Bonds
 Economic Recovery and Middle-Class Tax Relief Act of 2009
 Energy law of the United States
 European Economic Recovery Plan
 Federalreporting.gov
 Pathways out of Poverty (POP)
 Race to the Top
 School Improvement Grant
 Tax Credit Assistance Program

References

External links

 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as amended (PDF/details) in the GPO Statute Compilations collection
 Complete text of enacted statute at Wikisource
 Recovery.gov – A website of the Executive for transparency of actions taken under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
 Full Video of The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 signing ceremony on February 17, 2009 (from C-SPAN)
 Vice President Biden and President Obama speeches on the 1-year anniversary of the ARRA (from C-SPAN)
 Council of Economic Advisers-The Economic Impact of the ARRA Five Years Later – February 2014

Analysis
 Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output in 2014 — final report from Congressional Budget Office, February 2015
 Effect of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on 33 economic indicators — Bureau of Economic Analysis via FRED
 Stimulus.org Tracking the Stimulus, Financial Bailout, and Recovery Spending, from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
 Stimulus Analysis  – An economic and fiscal analysis of the Act, from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
 Stimulus Watch.org – built to help the new administration keep its pledge to invest stimulus money smartly
 A report of estimated ARRA funds for students with disabilities in public schools by state
 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 from Discourse DB
 EERE Network News , from Energy.gov

Acts of the 111th United States Congress
Great Recession in the United States
Obama administration initiatives
Protectionism in the United States
United States housing bubble
United States federal financial legislation
United States federal health legislation
United States federal housing legislation
United States federal taxation legislation
2009 in American politics
Canada–United States relations
Economic stimulus programs
Articles containing video clips
Fiscal policy


Roland George Starkes (June 4, 1890 – November 19, 1950) was a businessman and politician in Newfoundland. He represented Green Bay in the Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly from 1928 to 1934 as a Liberal.

He was born in Nippers Harbour, the son of Daniel Starkes, and was educated there. Starkes married Mary Noble. He became manager of the Union Trading Company store at Nippers Harbour in 1920. In 1924, he opened his own business there, later opening branches in Grand Behat and Lewisporte. In 1946, he was elected to represent Green Bay at the Newfoundland National Convention. Starkes supported union with Canada. He later moved to Lewisporte where he owned and operated a hotel. Starkes died in Montreal in 1950.

His son Harold later served in the Newfoundland and Labrador assembly.

References

Members of the Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly
1890 births
1950 deaths
Dominion of Newfoundland politicians
Newfoundland National Convention members

Roland G. Starkes


is the Japanese word for arrow, and commonly refers to the arrows used in . Ya also refers to the arrows used by samurai during the feudal era of Japan. Unlike Western arrows, the ya is close to a metre long or longer. Traditional ya are made from natural materials, usually bamboo, while modern ones may use aluminium or carbon fiber.

Parts of the ya

No (shaft)
The no are made from yadake bamboo and can have different shapes – straight or tapered – depending on the use of the arrow in long-distance shooting or target practice. Lighter arrows can lose their stability when shot from a strong bow, heavier arrows have a trajectory that arcs more. Typically they use bamboo from the Kanto area. This is for a purely practical reason: bamboo will not grow fast enough in a cold area and the joints are too close together, whereas in a warm area the bamboo grows too fast and the joints are too far apart; the Kanto area has a moderate climate which makes the joints the perfect distance apart. The joints of the shaft help with the balance. After harvesting, bamboo continues to change in size and shape so it must rest for  to 3 years after cutting before it can be used. When it has aged the proper time the bamboo should provide a good tight grip around the tang of the yanone. The bamboo is tempered in a special kiln similar to the Viking beehive style and straightened with a tool called a tomegi, or "tree tame", which is also used when creating bamboo fishing poles. The appearance of the no varies; some are plain, while others glisten with red lacquer. The proper length is measured from the archer's throat to five centimeters beyond the tip of the outstretched left hand.

Fletching
The arrows are fletched with hane (feathers) about fifteen centimetres in length, and fletching can be the most expensive part of the arrow. Traditionally, the outermost tail feathers of large birds of prey were considered the finest. Many of these birds are now endangered – in particular the sea eagle – and therefore feathers of lesser eagles, swans, geese or even turkeys are being used in modern times. On the other hand, owl feathers were never used, as they were thought to be bringers of misfortune.  Feathers from either the left and right wing may be used; these wing feathers naturally curve left or right. Ya with feathers from the left wing are called haya and they spiral clockwise, whereas ya made from the right wing feathers are called otoya and they spiraled counter-clockwise.

Nock
The nock or hazu is often made from goat or deer horn and archers file the slot to match the diameter of their own bowstring. Older or ceremonial ya can have bamboo nocks.

Arrowheads

Ya used for target practice have a conical iron tip called a ne.

Ya used in war by the samurai had a variety of tips called yajiri or yanone; these arrowheads were forged using the same steel (tamahagane) and methods as traditional Japanese swords. There are many different kinds of arrowhead and they all have their own special name. Togari-ya is a simple pointed design. The yanagi-ba, also known as "willow-leaf", is known for its elegant design. Karimata have a unique split point, and are sometimes referred to as "rope-cutters". The barbed "flesh-torn" is known as watakushi. The tagone-ya is shaped like a chisel. Kaburi-ya was used for signalling and creating fear with the loud whistling noise it would produce.

Ya were large enough that they could be signed on the tang by the fletcher in the manner of Japanese swords.

Gallery

See also
 Bodkin point
 Crossbow bolt
 Fire arrow
Kabura-ya (Japanese signal arrow) (鏑矢)
 Makiwara – a target, made from tightly-packed straw, for firing practice arrows in-to.

References

External links

Archery
Archery equipment of Japan
Arrow types
Samurai weapons and equipment

ja:矢

Ya (arrow)


Olympus Has Fallen is an American action movie from 2013. It is about commandos from North Korea holding people hostage in the White House. It stars Gerard Butler, Morgan Freeman, and Aaron Eckhart. It was released in summer of 2013.

A sequel, London Has Fallen, was released in March 2016.

2013 action movies
2013 thriller movies
2010s action thriller movies
American action thriller movies
English-language movies
Korean-language movies
Multilingual movies
Movies about revenge
Movies about terrorism
Movies about abduction
Movies set in North Korea
Movies set in Washington, D.C.
Drone movies
Movies directed by Antoine Fuqua

Olympus Has Fallen


Alex Kelly is a fictional character on the FOX television series The O.C., portrayed by Olivia Wilde. She is bisexual, dating both Seth Cohen and Marissa Cooper in the second season of the series.

Characterization and background

Conception
Creator Josh Schwartz described Alex as "the bad girl who runs the Bait Shop, which is the new club the kids are going to be hanging out at where all these bands will be performing at. She's our "Nat" (Beverly Hills 90210), if you will."

Background
Alex is the resident bad girl in the show. In season 2, she reveals to Seth that she was expelled from the Mater Dei School in Santa Ana (a Catholic school) and Newport Union High School, the local public school in Newport.

Character history

Season 2
When Seth needed tickets to The Walkmen show for Summer and Zach, in an attempt at friendship, he goes to The Bait Shop to buy them. He asks Alex and she says that the show is sold out and that he'd have to work there to get tickets, and ends up hiring him. Seth convinces her to go on a date with Ryan ("The New Era"), with himself and Lindsay joining to make it a double date. It turns out that Ryan and Alex have very little in common, and when the date is over Seth goes back to The Bait Shop and apologizes to her for the horrible night, in which she replies that he's bratty and immature, but also charming. She says there is hope for him yet, and Seth asks her to go for ice cream. She kisses him on the stairs as they leave, and share ice cream on the pier.

Seth invites her to the SnO.C. dance, she declines and tells him that he got the wrong idea out of the kiss. The same night, Zach appears at the Bait Shop for a drink. While there, he asks Alex for advice on Summer, oblivious to the fact that Alex actually knows Seth and Summer. She advises him to fight for Summer, otherwise she'll never fall for him. At the end of the conversation, she realizes that Zach is talking about Seth and Summer's relationship, and seems to contemplate making a move of her own. Alex shows up at the dance, and takes care of Seth after Zach punches him, and they end up sharing a kiss at the Bait Shop where they've gone to get a first aid kit. As their relationship has progressed, Seth keeps trying to impress her by being a "bad boy" by getting drunk and stealing Caleb's car. Upon realizing what Seth is doing Alex tells him that she's been with a lot of bad boys, and that he's just not one of them. She then proceeds to tell him that she likes him because he's a good guy. When Sandy, Seth's dad, shows up at the Bait Shop he asks her to tell Seth that they cannot see each other because Seth will not listen to him, as Sandy thinks Alex is a bad influence on Seth. When Seth ends up coming by the Bait Shop after sneaking out she tells him that his dad came by for a visit, and that she needs to do the right thing and not see him for a while. This doesn't last long as Alex then helps Seth and Sandy throw a surprise anniversary party for Kirsten, and they then approve of her. The good doesn't last long though; when Alex's ex-girlfriend, Jody, shows up in town it causes a strain between Seth and her and they decide to break up, and she apologizes for the incident.

Alex and Marissa start to watch a horror movie the night she and Seth broke up. When they decide that they are cold, Alex reaches over Marissa to pull a blanket over them. As she leans over and pulls back, they share a glance at one another, and it is something Marissa has never experienced before. Alex and Marissa become very close over the next while, and when Alex's ex-girlfriend will not let her leave her house, Marissa gets her out of it by saying that she and Alex are dating. The next day, Alex then questions why they hang out so much, which ended up hurting Marissa's feelings. Later on, though, at The Bait Shop, Alex is listening to Rachael Yamagata sing a sultry tune when Marissa approaches her from behind and takes her hand, weaving their fingers together. They exchange smiles. On Valentine's Day, Marissa goes to see Alex at the Bait Shop after an awful dinner with Julie Cooper. Alex then asks Marissa if she's in the mood for the beach, which is where they share their first kiss. Alex then feels that Marissa is embarrassed by her because she won't tell anyone about them, but Marissa then tells her best friend Summer, making her happy. In the episode The Rainy Day Women, Marissa moves in with Alex. However, Alex and Marissa end up experiencing some problems in their relationship, mainly because of her jealousy towards Ryan. They later break up ("The Blaze of Glory"), which leaves Alex feeling devastated, prompting her to decide that she wants to go back home and return to high school.

Alex appears in 13 episodes throughout the second season. She stated in the first episode that she appeared in (The New Kids on the Block) that she had attended (and got expelled from) numerous public schools in the surrounding areas. It's then revealed in a later episode (The Accomplice) that she had got emancipated from her parents; having done this, she dropped out of high school, got a job at The Bait Shop and moved into an apartment on the numeric streets of Newport Beach.

References

The O.C. characters
Fictional bartenders
Fictional bisexual women
Television characters introduced in 2004
Fictional managers
Fictional LGBT characters in television
American female characters in television

Alex Kelly (The O.C.)


Dimensioning is the process of measuring either the area or the volume that an object occupies. It is the method of calculating capacity for the storage, handling, transporting and invoicing of goods. Vehicles and storage units have both volume and weight capacity limits and can easily become full in terms of volume before they reach their capacity in weight. By dimensioning for capacity needs, companies and warehouses can make optimal use of space in order to minimize costs in order to maximize profits.

Background
In 1985, the Norwegian company Cargoscan, which officially became part of the Mettler Toledo group in 2000, began supplying dimensioners and data capture products to transport and logistics companies around the world. The aim was to provide the industry with a system for revenue recovery and protection. It seemed that if carriers were to take both weight and volume into consideration when invoicing, they could charge customers more fairly according to services provided and make better use of resources.

In transport and logistics
Shipping costs have historically been calculated based on weight alone. By charging only by weight, lightweight, low-density packages become unprofitable for freight carriers due to the amount of space they take up in trucks, aircraft, and ships in proportion to their actual weight. By using dimensioning technology to calculate an item's dimensional weight, carriers are able to charge based on either volume or weight, depending on which is greater.

In the warehousing industry, dimensioning is used to provide an overview of the volume items in stock which can reduce the costs of materials, return handling, shipping and manpower. It can also be used to determine capacity limits for storage to determine if additional storage requirements are needed at some point.

The main reasons that companies choose to invest in automated dimensioning systems include reduced operational costs, revenue recovery, increased throughput, reduced returns and quality control.

Dimensioning systems are used not only by the biggest companies in the industry such as DHL Express, United Parcel Service, FedEx and TNT but also by postal companies, shipping retailers, and small handling companies around the world

References

Freight transport

Dimensioning


Christian Leberecht Schnabel (13 May 1878 in Regensburg – 29 January 1936 in Munich) was a German designer and inventor.

Biography
Born as a son of a German smith and a Russian seamstress Schnabel was at times because of his original and innovative, but often as not very suitably for everyday life classified inventions, a well-known figure of the Bavarian public life. This made him, who received his education in his fathers smith near Regensburg,  an ideal victim of satire, from time to time Schnabel himself was asked to appear in smaller Cabaret-Shows and even a meeting with famous author Erich Kästner was reward for his dubious fame as a chronically fruitless inventor. Kästner was impressed by Schnabel and published after his death a poem about him in the book Dr. Erich Kästners lyrische Hausapotheke (1936). Later Schnabel was mentioned as one example for "the funny Germans" in an anthology.
"The easy is the most difficult" is a famous word of Schnabel and it also became the  principle of his life: Schnabel mostly experimented on everyday objects trying to improve them. Especially his simplistic food cutleries, which reached from a mixture between fork and knife up to a fork with only one prong became virtually legendary. Earning laughs for such inventions in his lifetime, today there are in more extensive cutlery sets not seldom found parts which are not unlike the Schnabel-Inventions around the turn of the century. Nevertheless it seems to be possible, that Schnabel never wanted to invent useful objects and must be seen as a kind of early performance artist.

References

Literatur
 Erfinder-Rundschau . München : Erfinder-Rundschau, 1913 -1914
 Rainer Thor : Humor ins Haus . Hamburg-Poppenbüttel : Humor ins Haus Bd. 340., Erfinder sind oft grosse Kinder, 1962

References

External links
 Christian Leberecht Schnabel – Der chronisch erfolglose Erfinder? at www.regensburger-nachrichten.de

20th-century German inventors
German designers
1878 births
1936 deaths
People from Regensburg

Christian Schnabel


The  was an infantry division in the Imperial Japanese Army. Its tsūshōgō code name was the .  It was also occasionally referred to in Korean accounts as Ranam Division, after the location of its main base. The 19th Division and the 20th Division were both raised as a garrison force for Korea. After Japan's victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, and subsequent occupation, and then annexation of Korea in 1910, the need was felt for a dedicated garrison force, raised from people with local knowledge. The 19th Division was stationed in far northeast Korea, in what is now North Hamgyong Province. The division received its colors on 24 December 1915 and headquarters have moved to Yongsan District 16 April 1916; however, the division was not considered combat-ready until 1918. The delay was due to limited funding available for the division to build its facilities in Korea and the need to recruit and train personnel from mainland Japan. In addition, the new division was beset with problems related to malaria and shigellosis at its main base at Ranam in northern Korea, having recorded 672 disease-related officers casualties during 1917. As result, the headquarters have moved to Ranam-guyok only 10 April 1919. The first commander of the 19th Division was Lieutenant General Tachibana Koichirō.

Action
After the Mukden Incident 18 September 1931, the regiment-sized detachment of the 19th Division, organized as 38th Independent Mixed Brigade was called upon to provide assistance to 20th division in Japanese invasion of Manchuria, during which it occupied Changchun and Harbin, and in the subsequent Pacification of Manchukuo. It continued to be stationed in Manchuria afterwards.

26 July 1938, the 19th division was called for a Battle of Lake Khasan against the Soviet Union. Afterwards, with increasing tension and subsequent border clashes the 19th Division had 500 killed and 900 wounded from 6 to 11 August 1938. It was then recalled to its original garrison location in Ranam on the Korean border area with the Soviet Union.

In May, 1943, the IJA 74th Infantry Regiment was separated from the 19th Division and was elevated to become the core of the new 30th Division.  As the situation for Japan continued to deteriorate for Japan in the Pacific War, a decision was made to trust in the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact, and reduce forces held back in reserve against the Soviet Union. In December 1944, the remainder of the 19th Division was transferred to the control of Japanese Fourteenth Area Army in the Philippines. The 19th Division was subsequently largely annihilated in combat in the mountains of central Luzon during the subsequent Battle of Luzon from January 1945 and ceased to exist a functional unit at that time.

As the sea blockade made reinforcement of Luzon problematic, parts of 19th division were re-routed to Kaohsiung, Taiwan 22 December 1944.

See also
 List of Japanese Infantry Divisions

References

 Madej, W. Victor, Japanese Armed Forces Order of Battle, 1937-1945 [2 vols], Allentown, PA: 1981

Coox, Alvin D. The Anatomy of a Small War: The Soviet-Japanese Struggle for Changkufeng/Khasan, 1938. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1977.

This article incorporates material from the Japanese Wikipedia page 第19師団 (日本軍), accessed 4 March 2016

Japanese World War II divisions
Infantry divisions of Japan
Military units and formations established in 1915
Military units and formations disestablished in 1945
1915 establishments in Japan
1945 disestablishments in Japan

19th Division (Imperial Japanese Army)


Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77 (2010), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court supported the "nerve center" test for determining corporate citizenship in the context of 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Hertz Corp believed that the case brought forward could not be tried in California jurisdiction and therefore hoped a case in a California court would be thrown out.  However, the state court ruled that there was California jurisdiction that was appropriate and re-established the importance of the "place of operations" test for firms.  The Supreme Court overruled but cautioned that the corporate headquarters will not be considered the principal place of business if it is not the actual center of direction, control, and coordination, such as if it were "simply an office where the corporation holds its board meetings."

Background
In September 2007, respondents Melinda Friend and John Nhieu, both citizens of California, sued the Hertz Corporation in a California Court, seeking damages for what was claimed to be a violation of California's wage and hour laws on behalf of a number of Californians who had allegedly experienced similar damages.

Hertz petitioned to move the case to a federal court, claiming that the two parties were citizens of different states and therefore diversity-of-citizenship was relevant.  To further support this claim, Hertz provided details showing that its operations were primarily in New Jersey and that its California operations were minor and did not constitute as its principal place of business.

Initially the court ruled that California was certainly a place of major business for Hertz, since a large amount of its revenue and income came from the state, and thus declared it was liable under California jurisdiction.  However, a subsequent ruling for a case involving Best Buy declared that Best Buy was not a citizen of California, despite similar circumstances and even less overall operations in the state.  After this Hertz petitioned for a writ of Certiorari which the court granted.

Case
Hertz was responsible for proving to the court that they were, indeed, not a California citizen to be entitled to a Federal court rather than a California court.  The court therefore sought to resolve the different interpretations that the various circuit courts had given up to that point.

The difficulty of the case came in determining the scope of "principal place of business", as the previous cases and statutes on the subject offered no concrete guidance.  Even looking at a series of historical cases, the court could not find anything conclusive.  The court could not find any compelling evidence to support either the "Nerve Center" or "Place of Operations" method and continued its deliberation.

The court eventually narrowed the two interpretations down to "nerve center" referring to the place of chief coordination of operations and "place of operations" referring to place generating the most significant revenues.  Even after this conclusive finding, the answer was still unclear.

Decision
The court decided that, although California operations were significant, they were not large enough for Hertz to be considered a California citizen; that is California was not Hertz' primary place of business generating a majority of its revenues.  Therefore, the court ruled that New Jersey was in fact the "Nerve Center" of Hertz where all its operations were headquartered, and thus it was entitled to a Federal Court through Diversity-of-Citizenship.  However, although Hertz was granted their petition successfully, the case was not over and then went on to a Federal court where the proceedings were heard and finished for the initial case.

Significance
This case established much of the protocol still used by the courts today in determining the citizenship of a corporation in diversity-of-citizenship cases.  It established a more loose code, rather than a uniform one, that examines both the "Nervous System" approach as well as the "Place of Operations" approach to reach a verdict.  This reasoning stems from the fact that all corporations are different and will have varying factors, levels of operations, and natures of headquarters that all may change its principal state of citizenship.  It is important to note that corporations can all have their own specific test to determine their citizenship.  However, it is also important to note that once a corporation has declared its citizenship to one state, it cannot make other claims in future cases of diversity-of-citizenship without severely altering either its chief place of operations or place of headquarters.

References

External links

United States Supreme Court cases
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
Diversity jurisdiction case law
2010 in United States case law

Hertz Corp. v. Friend


Ciociaria () is the name by which, starting from the modern era, some impoverished territories southeast of Rome were called at a popular level, without defined geographical limits. Starting from the Fascist period and the creation of the province of Frosinone, the same name was arbitrarily imposed by the local fascist organizations and then misused by the local press, by promotional associations and folkloristic events as a synonym for Frosinone and all the popular traditions of its territory.
The local dialect, in old literature referred to as campanino, although they are mere local variants of Central-Italian Latian is therefore improperly indicated as "ciociaro dialect", although the linguistic and scientific definition is Central-Northern Latian. In more recent times, the term Campagna Romana, or Roman Campagna, a favorite subject of countless painters from all over Europe, has referred to the adjoining region to the north of Ciociaria, but part of the Province of Rome.

Origin of the name
The term first appears in a map of the Papal States, in which a land in Campagna e Marittima province is named Ciociarìa. The variant Cioceria has been used since the 18th century.

The name would come from the derogatory term, in Roman dialect applied to some poor shepherds, because of their footwear, called in Roman dialect ciocie. These shoes, which were widespread among the poorest shepherds of much of Southern and Southeast Europe, are used today in the province of Frosinone only by folklore groups and for touristic initiatives.

Geography
Since, until the Fascist era, there were no official publications that imposed the term on the territories of the current province of Frosinone, the term, however rare, was used during the nineteenth century in a rather varied way with respect to geographical areas. In 1861, Franco Mistrali applied the term for example to the brigands of Sabina and not of Lazio.

Historical names

The correct geographic term for the northern area of the province of Frosinone is Valle del Sacco (or Middle Valle Latina (Latin Valley)). The area inhabited by the Hernici was known in Latin as ager Hernicus.

Literature and clichés
Except for the fascist propaganda of the time, most scholars believe that the toponym Ciociaria was originally widespread only in Roman popular culture and among the intellectuals who disseminated its traditions, thus resulting insignificant outside the borders of the Papal State: the term does not appear in any document of the Kingdom of Naples or the Two Sicilies to indicate the Liri Valley or the territory of Fondi, nor is the adjective ciociaro used to designate a population or a culture in the Neapolitan state. From the second post-war period, however, the realist and neorealist literary topos, the search for a common Christian Democratic political identity in southern Lazio and in part the suppression of the ecclesiastical province of Capua with the annexation of the dioceses of Monte Cassino, Aquino and Atina to the Roman ecclesiastical province, were the cultural factors that favored, in the common opinion, the spread of that point of view according to which this undefined and non-geographic term to the south reaches the Garigliano (including according to some even the Lazio coast).

Folklore and handicraft
On the basis of the above, various local institutions periodically organize various folkloristic events that recall the aforementioned clichés with respect to the clothing, religious initiatives and traditions of the territories of the valle del Sacco, considering them as manifestations of a "ciociaria tradition". These events include food fairs and music festivals, processions, performances of bands, palios and tournaments among the town's quarters.

Even the local artisanal production, which has historical roots in the much older craftsmanship of Lazio, Campania and Abruzzo is often improperly associated by tourist organizations, promotional events or the press as part of this "ciociara tradition". Among the best known objects in the artisanal production of the areas south east of Rome that are arbitrarily associated to this recent term there are copper amphoras (called "conca"); wicker and "vinchio" (marshy grass that grows on the slopes of the Aurunci Mounts) woven in the shape of baskets; terracotta amphorae, called "cannate", terracotta jugs made in Aquino and Fiuggi; gold and coral jewellery produced in Alatri, Anagni, Fiuggi, Veroli; works in copper and wrought iron; embroideries, like the embroidered towels and tablecloths of Veroli and Boville Ernica and the religious vestments produced in Anagni.

Rapes after the battle of Monte Cassino

The day following the Battle of Monte Cassino, Goumiers rampaged through the surrounding countryside committing mass rape in Southern Lazio. Victims of such crimes became known in Italy as , literally translatable as "Moroccaned".  Alberto Moravia wrote the novel  La ciociara on the event, which was made into a successful 1960 movie directed by Vittorio de Sica starring Sophia Loren and a 2015 opera by Marco Tutino. This further contributed to the spread of the term that is indeed often associated with these war crimes.

See also
 Ciociaria in cinematography

References

External links

 CiociariaTurismo, tourist organization
Keepers of a dying dialect: Italian immigrants in Sarnia, Ontario, still speak an ancient language

Ciociaria


The Philly Special, also known as Philly Philly, was an American football trick play between Philadelphia Eagles players Corey Clement, Trey Burton, and Nick Foles on fourth-down-and-goal toward the end of the second quarter of Super Bowl LII on February 4, 2018 at U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis.

On the play, quarterback Nick Foles moved up to behind his offensive line and Jason Kelce snapped the ball directly to running back Corey Clement. Clement went on to pitch the ball to Trey Burton, who passed the ball to a wide open Foles to score a touchdown. In so doing, Foles became the first player in Super Bowl history to both throw and catch a touchdown pass during a Super Bowl game.

Eagles coach Doug Pederson's decision to attempt to score a touchdown rather than attempt a field goal on the play helped put the Eagles in a better position to defeat the New England Patriots, which they subsequently did, 41–33. The victory was the Eagles' first championship in 57 years. Many analysts have since called the play one of the gutsiest play-calls in Super Bowl history.

The play was described by NFL Films as "a play that the Eagles had never called before, run on 4th down by an undrafted rookie running back pitching the football to a third-string tight end who had never attempted an NFL pass before, throwing to a backup quarterback who had never caught an NFL (or college) pass before, on the biggest stage for football."

Background

A play identical to the Philly Special had been successfully run at the college level on a two-point conversion attempt in 2012 by Clemson with Andre Ellington, DeAndre Hopkins and Tajh Boyd all involved against Georgia Tech. The Patriots also pulled off a version of the Philly Special against the Eagles in 2015. Tom Brady wandered out of the pocket and the ball was snapped to James White. White then pitched the ball to Danny Amendola who connected with Brady for a 36-yard pass. In 2016, the play was run in the NFL by the Chicago Bears against the Minnesota Vikings, at U.S. Bank Stadium, the same stadium in which the Philly Special also took place. Like Clemson, the Bears' attempt, led by Matt Barkley, Jeremy Langford and Cameron Meredith, was a success as they scored a touchdown on the play. Eagles receiver Alshon Jeffery, who was a member of the Bears at the time, stated his team's wide receivers coach Mike Groh, a former Bears coach in the same position, introduced the play to Doug Pederson. During the Detroit Lions Week 17 game against the Green Bay Packers, the Lions ran a nearly identical play to the Philly Special on a two point conversion late in the game. Ameer Abdullah took a direct snap, reversed to Golden Tate, who completed a pass to Matthew Stafford for a successful conversion. Eagles offensive coordinator Frank Reich considered running the play against the Vikings in the NFC Championship Game before Super Bowl LII, but relented due to the lopsided score.

Nick Foles had played as a tight end in high school during his sophomore year. After the Super Bowl, he stated that the last time he had caught a pass for a touchdown was when he was in high school. Trey Burton, at his high school, had been a first team all-state quarterback during his junior and senior years.  During his freshman year at the University of Florida, he scored six touchdowns in a single game, breaking the team record set by Tim Tebow.

Foles' experience as quarterback and tight end was at Westlake High near Austin, Texas. Sam Ehlinger, who went on to start as quarterback at the University of Texas, also played at Westlake and ran this same play during his junior year on November 28, 2015.  Soon after the Super Bowl, Ehlinger tweeted a video of his high school touchdown catch, saying "It's a Westlake thing."

Super Bowl LII game action prior to the play

During the second quarter, the Patriots had attempted a trick play with quarterback Tom Brady running a pattern as a receiver.  The ball was thrown on target by Danny Amendola, but it slipped through Brady's hands.  The drive ended after the next play with the Eagles taking possession.

During Philadelphia's drive previous to their attempt at a trick play at the end of the second quarter, Nick Foles' pass was intercepted by Patriots defensive back Duron Harmon. The Patriots, led by Tom Brady, drove down the field and scored on a James White 26 yard touchdown run to cut the Eagles lead to 3. After a Kenjon Barner kick return to the 30 yard line and two plays for 7 yards, the Eagles were faced with 3rd and 3. Nick Foles was able to find Corey Clement on a wheel route for 55 yards, which set up first-and-goal, but the Eagles' drive stalled, which brought up fourth-and-goal on the Patriots' 1-yard line. Foles and the Eagles were lining up to run a fourth-down play before Pederson called for a timeout (Philadelphia's first timeout of the first half).

When Foles and Pederson met during the timeout, Foles suggested to use the Philly Special, which Pederson then gave his approval.

The play

Foles lined up in the shotgun formation, but moved up to the right side of the offensive line behind right tackle Lane Johnson and yelled "kill, kill". Foles then stayed on the right side of the offensive line and the ball was snapped to running back Corey Clement. Clement then ran left and flipped the ball to Trey Burton, to complete a reverse to the right side of the field. Finally, Burton threw the ball to Foles, who ran a route to the right corner of the end zone and made the catch for a Philadelphia touchdown. After the extra-point was successfully kicked by Jake Elliott, the Eagles went up 22–12, maintaining the score into halftime.

Legality

Following the play, some questioned if it was legal. The NFL rule states that the "offensive team must have at least seven players on line" and defines that a non-snapper player is on the line if his helmet "break[s] a vertical plane that passes through the beltline of the snapper." However, they argued that Eagles' wide receiver Alshon Jeffery was slightly off the line of scrimmage. Therefore, some argued that the Eagles had only six players on the line instead of the required seven. Fox Sports rules expert and former NFL referee Mike Pereira even said "...They lined up wrong ... Not only that, [but] it's a trick play. And if you're going to run a trick-type play, then you have to be lined up properly ... It's kind of one of those [penalties] that has no effect on the play. I get it. But they didn't line up properly. And it really should've been called."  However, before the snap, Jeffery pointed to the down judge several times to confirm he lined up correctly and got a head nod in return each time, indicating he was properly aligned.  This practice is typical at all levels of the sport for confirming proper alignment.

Broadcasting calls
Before the play was called, NBC broadcaster Cris Collinsworth expressed his shock on-air that the Eagles would go for it, as he said, "This is an unbelievable call ... This is like going for an onside kick. This could decide the game."  He then noticed the alignment just prior to the snap, and uttered, "Uh-oh," quietly.

Television
Al Michaels made the call with Collinsworth for NBC.

Radio
Eagles broadcasters Merrill Reese and Mike Quick made the call for 94.1 WIP, the team's flagship station.

Aftermath

The Eagles went on to win Super Bowl LII, 41–33. It was the team's first NFL championship since 1960, and first ever Super Bowl win.

After the game, coach Doug Pederson told reporters, "We call [the play] the Philly special." Pederson also noted that the play came from "[looking] at different plays around the league and the collegiate ranks, and things that over the years that might fit what we do. We found this one that fit, and we've been working on it for the last couple of weeks and tonight was the night."

Two days after the game, Showtime's Inside the NFL released footage with audio between Coach Doug Pederson and Nick Foles. It showed Foles suggesting the Philly Special, saying "You want Philly Philly?", and Pederson responding, after a thoughtful pause, by saying "Yeah, let's do it."

On February 20, ESPN's Darren Rovell announced that the Philadelphia Eagles had filed for a trademark for the term "Philly Special."  Seven other groups, including Yuengling, also filed for the trademark. Yuengling later retracted their file for the trademark. The Eagles successfully secured a trademark registration for the term on October 5, 2021. The team uses the term for apparel and other paraphernalia.

At the 2018 NFL owners meetings in Orlando, Florida, Pederson said that the play is being unofficially retired for at least one season due to other teams' awareness of the play.

On June 14, 2018, the Eagles received their Super Bowl rings. The bezel of the ring contained 127 diamonds, which is the total from the numbers of the jerseys of the three players who handled the ball after the snap on the Philly Special—Corey Clement (30), Trey Burton (88) and Nick Foles (9).

In September 2018, a statue commemorating the Philly Special, showing the moment of discussion between Nick Foles and Doug Pederson, was unveiled at Lincoln Financial Field. The statue was commissioned by Bud Light and sculpted by Raymond Gibby.

In 2022, Eagles' offensive linemen Lane Johnson, Jason Kelce and Jordan Mailata released a Christmas album named A Philly Special Christmas. The album's name is inspired by the Philly Special.

Similar plays

NFL
On September 6, 2018, during the first game of the  season, the Eagles ran a similar trick play against the Atlanta Falcons successfully, gaining a first down. Despite the Philly Special being occasionally called "Philly Philly" due to the conversation Foles and Pederson had regarding calling that play, Pederson indicated the play in the Falcons–Eagles game is called "Philly Philly."

On September 20, 2018, the Cleveland Browns ran the play successfully for a two-point conversion against the New York Jets. Running back Duke Johnson took the snap and handed the ball off to wide receiver Jarvis Landry, who threw a pass to quarterback Baker Mayfield. As Landry is left-handed, the play was run to the left side of the field, rather than the right side. This play has earned nicknames "Baker Special" after Mayfield, "Cleveland Special," and the "Dilly Special" in reference to Bud Light's "Dilly Dilly" ad campaign. This play tied the game that the Browns went on to win, ending a 19-game winless streak.  Bud Light placed "victory fridges" in several Cleveland-area taverns that unlocked upon the Browns winning.

During week six of the 2021-2022 NFL season, in a game between the Buffalo Bills and the Tennessee Titans on Monday Night Football, the Bills successfully attempted the Philly Special on a two point conversion. Play-by-play announcer Steve Levy coined the play "The Buffalo Special."

On December 2, 2018, the Chicago Bears successfully ran the play for a touchdown against the New York Giants as time expired in the fourth quarter to tie the game and force overtime. Trey Burton, who signed with the Bears during the 2018 offseason, flipped the ball to Tarik Cohen, who threw the touchdown. However, the Giants would go on to win the game in overtime.

On September 19, 2021, the Eagles attempted a similar play against the San Francisco 49ers. Greg Ward, a quarterback in college, attempted to throw to Jalen Hurts, but the pass was incomplete.

In Super Bowl LVI, the Cincinnati Bengals ran a trick-play where running back Joe Mixon threw a touchdown to wide receiver Tee Higgins. Mixon was the first non-quarterback to throw a touchdown in the Super Bowl since Burton. The Los Angeles Rams tried to run a similar trick play to the Philly Special later in the game. Ram's quarterback Matthew Stafford handed off the ball to running back Darrell Henderson, who flipped the ball to wide receiver Cooper Kupp, but Kupp overthrew an open Stafford.

On  October 2, 2022 the New York Jets successfully ran a similar play for a touchdown against the Pittsburgh Steelers. Wide receiver Braxton Berrios  took the handoff on a reverse and rolling to his right. He then threw a touchdown pass to quarterback Zach Wilson, who was wide open in the end zone.

AAF
Steve Spurrier called the "Orlando Special" during the inaugural game of the Alliance of American Football; it was a success, propelling the Orlando Apollos to a 40–6 win over the Atlanta Legends.

NCAA
On September 21, 2019, the Pittsburgh Panthers college football team called the "Pitt Special" during a matchup against the then-unbeaten UCF Knights, leading the Panthers to a 35–34 victory over the Knights.

The North Carolina Tar Heels ran an adaptation of the play on two occasions, first in the 2019 Military Bowl against Temple, and secondly against Miami in the final game of the 2020 regular season. The Tar Heels' variation was run from under center, with wide receiver Rontavius "Toe" Groves throwing the pass to quarterback Sam Howell both times. Both instances resulted in touchdowns.

On September 11, 2021, Notre Dame tried to execute a Philly Special against Toledo, but quarterback Jack Coan was covered on the play. Avery Davis instead improvised, finding running back Kyren Williams for a successful two-point conversion.

On September 18, 2021, San Diego State and backup quarterback Lucas Johnson successfully executed the Philly Special to defeat the Utah in the third overtime.

On November 20, 2021, the Cincinnati Bearcats executed the Philly Special in the third quarter against the SMU Mustangs. The play resulted in quarterback Desmond Ridder's first collegiate touchdown reception.

References

External links

Philadelphia Eagles postseason
2010s in Minneapolis
2017 National Football League season
2018 in sports in Minnesota
American football incidents
Culture of Philadelphia
February 2018 sports events in the United States
New England Patriots postseason
Super Bowl plays
Tom Brady

Philly Special