Yesterday, Watchdog.com broke the story about numerous bogus claims on the federal site Recovery.com, 30 new or saved jobs in Arizona’s 15th district; 25 jobs saved or created in Connecticut’s 42nd district, and the list can go on.

Today, Watchdog.com has more information.

According to data retrieved from Recovery.gov, nearly $6.4 billion was used to “create or save” just under 30,000 jobs in these [440] phantom congressional districts–almost $225,000 per job. The web site operates on an $84 million budget and is tasked with monitoring the distribution of the $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress–which, for the record, counts 435 members–in early 2009.

To see a list of the 440 bogus districts, click here.

The site’s monitors, however, are not too savvy about America’s political or geographic landscape. More than $2 million was given to the 99th District of North Dakota, a state which has only one congressional district. In order to qualify for 99 districts, North Dakota would have to have a population of about 60 million people, almost 24 million more people than California…

South Carolina’s 7th took the cake, garnering more than $27 million in stimulus funds, despite being eliminated in 1930. And Virginia’s 12th District may have been written off at the start of the Civil War, but it must carry some sentimental value in Old Dominion–it received more than $2 million, according to recovery.gov…

The stimulus helped to create 35 congressional districts in Washington D.C. and the four American territories, all of which have no congressional districts. These areas received $5 of the $6.4 billion distributed to the non-existent districts…

Vice President Joe Biden admitted that the administration’s statistics were flawed after an Associated Press study revealed several instances of exaggerated and outright false job creation. The vice president acknowledged that “further updates and corrections are going to be needed.”

Either, the editors of Recovery.com think we’re all morons, or they are incredibly lazy. I’m thinking it’s probably both; there has apparently been no attempt to proof the site, at all.

Duane Lester, at All American Blogger, asks a good question. Given all this, do you want to depend on the government for a health recovery(.com)?