Without a doubt, Obama has tried to “have it all” on this stimulus bill…. nicely laid out in Newsweek’s Robert Samuelson’s op-ed today, Obama Ducks Hard Choices: Why investing in tomorrow won’t help today’s economy. He made an ambitious reach, along with his Dem leadership, to package a financial boost along with big spending energy and education, health care, and a new infrastructure.
As it turns out, President Obama didn’t make the tough choices on the stimulus package. He could have either used the program mainly (a) to bolster the economy or (b) to advance a larger political agenda, from energy efficiency to school renovation. But Obama wanted both, and, superficially, the two can be portrayed as an enlightened partnership.
~~~In its releases, the White House gushes superlatives. The stimulus program, says one fact sheet, “launches the most ambitious school modernization program on record,” “computerizes every American’s health record in five years” and “undertakes the largest weatherization”—insulation—”program in history.” What a bonanza of good stuff!
~~~The decision by Obama and Democratic congressional leaders to load the stimulus with so many partisan projects is politically shrewd and economically suspect. The president’s claims of bipartisanship were mostly a sham, as he skillfully maneuvered Republicans into a no-win position: Either support a Democratic program, or oppose it—and seem passive and uncaring.
But the result is that the stimulus, as an act of economic policy, is hobbled. A package so large can be defended only because the economy is so weak—and seems to be getting weaker by the moment. The central purpose is simple: halt downward momentum. Perhaps some of the out-year spending might ultimately prove useful. But the immediate need is for the stimulus package to stimulate—now. It needs to be front-loaded; it isn’t.Obama’s political strategy fails to address adequately the economy’s present needs while also worsening the long-term budget outlook. Some of his “temporary” spending increases in practice will almost certainly become permanent. There were tough choices to be made—and Obama ducked them.
[Mata Musing: There’s some “good stuff” in this article specifically about that alternative energy grid, BTW… have a full read.]
But as the events of the day wear on, it’s fascinating to watch a man who seemed so confident in government and his party’s spending plans as being “the cure” inch a tad into the more traditional conservative corner on economics…. resigning himself to the reality that he just may have to have his cake, sans the icing.
He did tap the GOP Senator from New Hampshire, Judd Gregg, as his new Commerce Secretary… with a few humorous caveats thrown in to soften the blow to his liberal cohorts.
“Clearly, Judd and I don’t agree on every issue, most notably who should’ve won the [presidential] election,” Obama joked in announcing the nomination, “but we do agree on the urgent need to get American businesses and families back on their feet.”
Gregg will be an “able, persuasive ambassador for industry” because he is a skillful negotiator and a “master of reaching across the aisle to get things done,” Obama said.
Project Vote Smart shows him to be relatively conservative on the issues, with few exceptions. CNN describes him as “known for being fiscally conservative.”
Conservative, Michelle Malkin, thoroughly disagrees, while DailyKO’s brownsox can’t figure out why Obama’s doing it, and calls it “regrettable” while giving it the thumbs on the “Noble Spirit of Bipartisanship”.
Apparently, Gregg’s pick doesn’t please anyone… and perhaps that’s a good thing in itself.
BTW, it appears Gregg was recommended by his pal, Harry Reid. So one would have to guess this is one conservative they either consider friendly enough to deal with, or one they can manipulate easily.
Gregg, however is to be commended for refusing to accept the nomination if his replacement upset the current balance of the Senate.
But all this chummy chummy stuff with the GOP has much of Obama’s liberal, progressive, and social welfare base very uncomfortable. As he seeks to strip out some of the “future investments” from the stimulus bill for another day, many of the liberal beneficiaries are a’scramble to save their piece of the stimulus pie. Everyone from teachers to those in the arts are assuming the position, wearing their “I’m not expendable… I’m stimulus!” tee shirts.
As the Obama administration seeks ways to streamline his stimulus plan to appeal to Republican lawmakers, the president risks alienating key allies in his liberal base.
A range of interest groups are aggressively making the case that favored projects and programs deserve funding as part of the stimulus plan, even while the president and his aides scour the package for items they can eliminate.
~~~“In my judgment, [the push for funding] is as important as an election campaign,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers.
Her group is bringing teachers from around the country to Washington Wednesday for a national lobbying day, to highlight the importance of maintaining $159 billion in education aid in the latest version of the stimulus plan.
“The economy and educational opportunities are completely and totally intertwined, both in the long-term and the short-term,” Weingarten said. “It’s absolutely critical to do it now. This is what leadership is about.”
~~~“It’s a big tension,” said Julian Zelizer, a political science professor at Princeton University. “The more he moves to the center, and to the right, the more he risks losing some of his core supporters, who have limited tolerance for these kinds of compromises.”
Thus far, the Dems have agreed to strip the anti-smoking funds, and Obama intervened on the House version and removed “$200 million that was to be set aside to refurbish the National Mall, and a Medicaid expansion that would have allowed all states to expand family-planning services, including contraception, for low-income women.”
These have the public health and womens groups – particularly NOW – all in an uproar, of course.
Dems and liberals alike are complaining that too much of the package is going towards tax cuts, and the Arts groups are circling the wagons and lobbying Obama to protect their cut.
In the meantime, the House Dems and Republican are both launching local media attack campaigns.
The House Democrats’ political arm is launching a radio, email, and telephone campaign against 28 House Republicans in 20 states who voted against the $819 billion economic-stimulus package last week.
The “Putting Families First” campaign will being airing Tuesday morning on drive time radio and run throughout the week. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee also said they will target three million voters with an email campaign and make 100,000 phone calls.
Targeted members in leadership include Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia, Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, and National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions of Texas.
~~~House Republicans, in turn, are targeting media in more than two dozen Democratic districts who voted in favor of the package Republicans criticize as fiscally irresponsible. The Democrats ad campaign is “nothing more than a desperate attempt to save face after House Democrats suffered a number of PR embarrassments for larding up a trillion-dollar bill disguised as a ‘stimulus’ package,” said National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Ken Spain in a statement.
With all these events, I *might* (just might, mind you) to be inclined to believe that Obama may not be so convinced of his own liberal/progressive campaign talking points on financial cures. Afterall, were he so sure that the vast spending truly would improve the economy, he’d be standing firm and utilizing the Democrats power in Congress despite Republican opposition.
But then, he’s no doubt conscious of both public and media criticism. Using the power of Congress so early, and against the better judgment of most of the nation, is a waste of that power. By adding a GOP to his administration in charge of Commerce, and acquiescing to GOP demands to remove much of the pork, Obama’s inching to the right demonstrates flexibility, and certainly packs his political capital coffers… at least with some constituents and Congress members.
I have no doubts he’ll go for the rest of the gold in a new future attempt. But for now, I’m going to give Obama a cautious thumbs up for finding the middle ground on this contentious issue. But then, the devil will remain in the final details… for one man’s view of what’s considered stimulus may be another man’s pork.
Or, as Harry Reid said when sniping at Republicans for not falling into line without opposition:
“If we don’t [pass the bill], it’s not our fault, we’re trying,” Reid said. “The president has done a remarkable job covering all the bases on Capitol Hill.”
~~~Reid pushed back on GOP complaints that not all of the spending in the package was truly stimulative.
“Stimulus is in the eye of the beholder,” Reid said
Either Obama and Reid “behold” differently, or they’re saving their political capital pennies for another day.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
I keep telling you guys, Obama’s agenda isn’t radical social change, it’s to move as far to the right as possible and capture as much of the electorate he can, in the process. The GOP is his best ally in this. He counts on the filibuster threats to keep overly leftist bills off his desk. He uses GOP opposition to provide an excuse to the liberal base for not being able to give them what they want. He had a closed door meeting with the GOP House before their vote on Pelosi’s stimulus and basically told them to go ahead and vote no and, not to worry, they’d get back a bill from the Senate which was much more palatable. That’s exactly what’s happening now.
I also keep saying: Bush’s Wall Street rescue was toxic. The stimulus package is toxic. The proposed GOP tax cuts are toxic. The only thing which makes any sense at all is Mitch McConnell’s proposal for the government to guarantee 4% mortgages and re-financings.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Not so quick, Larry. Obama most certainly tried his best to get an “overly leftist” bill thru. And I’m sure had it passed in it’s first form, he would have been one happy camper.
He ran into not only a minority GOP’s obstacle (even tho they were powerless to stop it), but a large percentage of the US public also not thrilled with this attempt.
You are giving credit to Obama for not having a “radical social change”, when in fact he tried to do just that. You should give credit instead to the public, even a skeptical media, plus the GOP for thwarting that desired “radical social change”.
And McConnell’s proposal has hidden cost consequences that outweight the benefits.
What’s the evidence that Obama “certainly tried his best to get an ‘overly leftist’ bill through” ?
Here’s an earlier post of mine, from the thread on the House vote on the stimulus bill:
>>>
What’s behind the united House Republican oppostion to Pelosi’s “stimulus plan?”
The POTUS
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/29/AR2009012904329.html
By the way, this goes back to the issue of the GOP actually being President Obama’s allies, as much as his opposition. I voted for a Republican (Dana Rohrabacher) in the election for my Congressional House district, in part because of his principled vote (twice) against the Bush/Paulson Wall Street bail out and in part because I didn’t want solid Dem Congressional majorities to push Obama too far leftward. For this reason, and because I want the better candidate to win, I hope that Coleman can somehow prevail in his court challenge to Franken’s highly dubious victory in the Minnesota Senate race. GOP vetoes will hopefully spare Obama the necessity to lose too much political capital on the Left, while he tries to secure as much capital as he can on the Right.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Larry, timing is everything. And you are taking the events two days before the vote, and ignoring the week or so prior to that moment.
By the time Obama had his “internal” meeting with the Dems on Tues, before their vote two days later, the media and conservative talk shows had already whipped up the challenge to this bill… and it struck a bipartisan chord in the public. Remember that it was only a week earlier Obama was trying to isolate Rush Limbaugh, telling the GOP Congress to ignore the man behind the EIB curtain.
What you think is Obama being “against pork” is actually what I consider realistic acquiescence to public opinion. The media and public winds were not at his back on Tues for that “internal meeting” because of prior events. This was a way for him to tell the GOP to “do the right thing” in the House, and promise a chance for changes with Ver2 in the Senate.
But you will never convince me that Obama would not have been happy to have the full enchilada as originally written. He most certainly *did* advocate for fast passage with his expedient “must pass” video messages and his personal assault on Rush. It was only when all that effort failed to change public and some media opinion, that he took the route you give him credit for.
Larry is trying to find all sort of excuses for Obama to try to make him look good, just like married women does for their alcoholic husband. Larry is a co-dependant of Obama… lol. Obama is an idiot, he has never done anything in his life except for corrupt deals as a “community organiser”. He will never reach out for a true Republican, he will only try to buy out Rinos… and it will exacerbate the right conservative republicans.
Here is the reality of his stupid bailout:
As the chart on the right shows, The Trillion Dollar Debt Plan passed by the House last night surpasses even the inflation adjusted spending increases of the New Deal. To put this in perspective, Shanea Watkins and Patrick Tyrrell have crunched the numbers to look at what the 78,425,000 family households in the United States would have to give up, if the federal government had to borrow this money from its own citizens:
These amounts account for a large portion of the goods and services that families spend their money on annually. According to the 2007 Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES), families are spending:
* $2,330 on apparel and services,
* $3,595 on health care,
* $4,322 on food at home, and
* $11,657 annually on shelter.
If all families were asked to equally shoulder the burden of the $825 billion stimulus package, it would be like asking them to take on an amount of debt equivalent to what they spend on food, clothing, and health care or most of what they spend on shelter for an entire year.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/01/29/the-trillion-dollar-debt-plan-vs-the-new-deal/
Peter Schiff says that:
“Governments cannot create but merely redirect. When the government spends, the money has to come from somewhere. If the government doesn’t have a surplus, then it must come from taxes. If taxes don’t go up, then it must come from increased borrowing. If lenders won’t lend, then it must come from the printing press, WHICH IS WHERE ALL THESE BAILOUTS ARE HEADED. BUT EACH ADDITIONAL DOLLAR PRINTED DIMINISHES THE VALUE OF THOSE ALREADY IN CIRCULATION. SOMETHING CANNOT BE EFFORTLESSLY CREATED FROM NOTHING.
Similarly, any jobs or other economic activity created by public-sector expansion merely comes at the expense of jobs lost in the private sector. And if the government chooses to save inefficient jobs in select private industries, more efficient jobs will be lost in others. AS MORE FACTORS OF PRODUCTION COME UNDER GOVERNMENT CONTROL, THE MORE INEFFICIENT OUR ENTIRE ECONOMY BECOMES. Inefficiency lowers productivity, stifles competitiveness and lowers living standards.”
The best part of the Republican proposal today is the corporate tax cut. I wish they would go more pragmatic rather than partisan and push for this one significant proposal.
Come on now, Fit… you’re just pandering to us “hard core” types, right? :0)
No, lowering corperate taxes would do much more to stimulate the economy than personal income taxes in any income bracket. I believe the best stilmulus bill will be a bi partisan bill and I believe this is the best idea put forth by the Republicans.
THIS BLOG IS SO DEPRESSING. Too many leftist commentators have their head in the sand. It makes my pH go acid. Obama is in NO WAY trying to do the best thing for this country. He wants to destroy it so he can pull his communist agenda. He is the ONE who pushed bad loans to people who couldn’t afford it thru Acorn, he is behind this whole financial crisis. HE WANTED THIS CRISIS TO HAPPEN… HE NEEDED IT. Wake up America! Boy you will be scr…d when you finally wake up. I am moving away from FA for good. No point discussing here these issues; too many Obama adorers for me. My last advice to you, leave USA while you still can.
He BELIEVES that he is, that makes his agenda even more dangerous. It makes it all the much harder to sway him politically, because it is impossible to argue with ideology (kind of like it is impossible to argue with YOUR ideology).
What’s sad, is that you are right about so many things, but you bury your valid points in such a huge pile of hateful garbage that no one will ever pay any attention to you. I think you need to focus on your own government for a while, Craig. When you have defeated the socialist influences there, then come on back here and preach to us how it is done. Until then, good riddance.
Sorry Wisdom. We part company on this particular remark. Craig went off the deep end after the election. Any conspiracy theory works for him…. and screw the US judicial or electoral process we use to combat dissention.
But have no fear. This is the 3rd or 4th time Craig’s left in a huff. Drama vs reality….
But for the time being, we can breath easily. At least we are spared 200-300 comments monthly of conspiracy theories.
Uffda, the train has left the track, the Obama Express was going faster than a speeding bullet, don’t know how anyone could consider it anyhing other than a train wreck at this point. Now he’s wanting the Repubs to be there for salvage duty? All on board for foreign policy?
Like I said, when obama proved himself unworthy of the “worship”
or “hope” people like Larry threw his way, they would sink deeper
into denial. Rather than face reality we get more delusional spin.
Larry does have a point, which has so far gone without comment. Obama is, above all else, an astute politician. He realizes that the base that elected him may not always be thrilled with his performance, and therefore sees the value in getting the more liberal GOP members to back him up. He is a shrewd pol, and is doing his best to gain acceptance from all corners of the geopolitical globe. If it works, he expects to go down in history as a president ‘par exellence’. If it fails, he’s in for four very long years. Public adulations will not save him if he makes too many enemies on both sides of the aisle.
JV
You’re new here, ruaqtpi2. Otherwise you’d know that Larry and many of us have discussed Obama’s vanity (aka his “astute” political savvy in the past)… and actually find ourselves having to bank on his personal focus on his legacy. This is why Larry starts out with “I keep telling you guys….”
Personally, I always find it offensive that we elect a lying politician with all the wrong ideas, and then hope his vanity for greatness brings him around to doing the right thing. But that’s all we got at the moment.
“The president’s claims of bipartisanship were mostly a sham, as he skillfully maneuvered Republicans into a no-win position: Either support a Democratic program, or oppose it—and seem passive and uncaring.”
“Bipartisanship – scam”
No doubt about it.
“Skillfully maneuvered”
Skillfully my ass. It was done so amateurishly that the Republicans weren’t fooled for a minute.
“..Republicans into a no-win position.”
How is this “no-win position” when the taxpayers also recognized that this bill was anything but “bipartisan,” is clearly a sham, and that the bill itself is a boondoggle ‘gift’ of pork and pet Democratic socialism projects flimsily wrapped in ineffective “stimulus” paper.
The President and Democrats have another very big problem with this “stimulus” bill. Recent reports are that China may not be able to finance the debt required to pay for it. (or any other future US debt.)
I think that it was politically insane for both the Democrats, Republicans, and capitalist big-wigs to put the US in this outrageous deficit situation where our country owes China. the Global trade imbalance is bankrupting our nation, and eventually this kind of leadership in Washington will end with our dollar being nearly worthless. Have these educated morons learned nothing from the history of other nations on the affects on societies when a nation continues to “solve” their money problems by simply printing more? The more they print, the more worthless our money becomes. This often ends in inflation or even hyper inflation. If wages do not keep pace, it is effectively a loss in revenue.
@ditto:
“China may not be able to finance the debt required to pay for it. (or any other future US debt”
Maybe they found investments to pursue in countries that don’t make a habit of insulting them.
http://www.fxstreet.com/fundamental/market-view/insights-market-outlook/2009-01-27.html
Astute politician? Comments like this always cause a chuckle. Maybe in a few months when his aura, coming not from the world the rest of us live in, dissapates due to the real Obama, his voters will take it upon themselves to take a good look at what they bought. Maybe.
The “community organizer” left his area of responsibility in shambles. Other than voting present in the IL State Senate his accomplishments on record belong to his senate peers. The only thing he worked at was paying back the special interest groups that backed him, and his accomplishments in the US Senate? nothing that he should brag about.
If one might think it’s crowded “under that famous bus” try focusing on what the “wizard” has behind the curtain, quite a crowd. Peruse through that monstrosity of a stimulus package and you will begin to understand who he’s paying back for the OO and yes, he knew what was in it and was content to let it slop through.
I may be a recent contributor, but I’ve been lurking for quite awhile (and I have followed many of the threads discussing/debating Obama’s characteristics.) I am neither Republican nor Democrat; rather, I identify with civil libertarians. FWIW, I’m a caucasian 48 year-old male living in the suburbs of Chicago. I know Obama’s politics well.
When I say he (Obama) is an astute politician, I mean it with all the disgust and distaste possible. He may be in over his head when it comes to the economy (and foreign policy, and infrastructure, and criminal justice, and …), but he knows how to play the game. That’s where he is astute (substitute “functionally aware” if you don’t like “astute”.)
It nonetheless amazes me how accepting The Bi-racial Messiah’s supporters have been up until now, though even the MSM seems to be enjoying the ease with which scandals keep flowing from his party and administration.
Maybe we heard him wrong. Perhaps he said it was time to usher in a new era of (ir)responsibility?
JV
@ruaqtpi2:
You could be close to me. I live 45 minutes NW of O’Hare or maybe by my daughter in Lake in the Hills. Welcome fellow Illinoisan, bout time you spoke up.
I’ve always believed the game has been played for him. That he should actually give credit to Jeremiah Wright for the soaring oratory skills he adopted and used until the gda comment became public, and credit to whoever writes the nonsense. Prior to the tapes, Obama was preaching to the masses, reminded me of the old fire and brimstone preachers we used to listen to when I was younger. I noticed he abruptly stopped using that style immediately after the tapes. But, by that time he had the dazed followers and the press. Remember the race speech was better than Gettysburg?
I’m in Joliet (45 minutes SW of downtown Chicago), though my youngest brother used to live in Lake in the Hills. Small world!
Obama does come across like a pastor, which doesn’t surprise me. He has obviously patterned himself in the style of Wright and Flaherty, and it just reinforces the image of him of “Prophet” (as seen through his disciples’ rose-colored glasses.) I ain’t buying it, but I can see the appeal to those who have allowed themselves to be brainwashed and are perfectly willing to be told what opinions they should hold.
Unfortunately, though Obama has toned down his rhetoric a bit since the election, he’s still mostly hot air. Sure he can write and read speeches, but even then his oratory is empty (but pointed.) Bi-partisan means that republicans agree on democrats’ proposals, but not vice-versa. His call to sacrfice applies only to others. Save energy by running heaters less, except in the White House. No lobbyists in my administration (unless it’s convenient). Audacity, hope, change, responsibility, … all just words for pretty speeches meant to dupe the lemmings. And it worked.
I like ditto’s comments (#17).
Debt sucks. It’s been the biggest sucking sound in the economy since the George W Bush’s $1 trillion “stimulus” package (paid for with borrowed money), also known as tax cuts for the wealthy. And then George W Bush followed this up with a $700 billion bailout for Wall Street, which will also cost well over a $trillion, considering interest. So you’ve got a GOP President who ran up $2 trillion in additional debt, simply for “stimulus” and Wall Street bail outs, when the first $trillion “stimulus” played a major role in creating the financial crisis which led to the need for bailouts, and you are focusing 100% of your critical invective on a $trillion plan, which I agree is a very ill-advised boondoggle, but which will at least pay for things like infrastructure and health care and education.
I am sick, sick, sick of debt, debt, debt, and more debt.
But, with apologies to Billy Joel, Obama didn’t start the fire.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
The Bush tax cuts actually shifted the tax burden further toward the rich.