This is a silly idea for many of the same reasons that Hillary's proposed $5000 "baby bond" -- which (presumably like Obama's $1000 check) would go to people of all income levels -- made little sense. I wrote then that:
It would help condition otherwise self-sufficient voters to sup at the government trough – to expect government assistance even when it’s not necessary. For a liberal like Clinton, whose ideology calls for transferring control over Americans’ lives from private to government hands, even an economically regressive policy is palatable if it helps advance that agenda.
Substitute "Obama" for "Clinton" -- and note that the word changes, but the song remains the same.
Update: George McGovern, too, wanted to "give" out $1000 to American families -- back in 1972. Could Obama be considered "McGovern on the cheap"?