| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| Congress passes B.O. stimulus plan | |
| 2009-01-29 | |
| In a swift victory for US President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives approved a historically huge $819 billion economic stimulus bill Wednesday night with spending increases and tax cuts at the heart of the young administration's plan to revive a badly ailing economy. The vote was 244-188, with Republicans unanimous in opposition despite Obama's pleas for bipartisan support. "This recovery plan will save or create more than three million new jobs over the next few years," the US president said in a written statement released moments after the House voted. Earlier, Obama had declared "we don't have a moment to spare" as congressional allies hastened to do his bidding in the face of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.
A mere eight days after Inauguration Day, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday's events heralded a new era. "The ship of state is difficult to turn," said the California Democrat. "But that is what we must do. That is what President Obama called us to do in his inaugural address." With unemployment at its highest level in a quarter-century, the banking industry wobbling despite the infusion of staggering sums of bailout money and states struggling with budget crises, Democrats said the legislation was desperately needed. "Another week that we delay is another 100,000 or more people unemployed. I don't think we want that on our consciences," said Democratic Rep. David Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and one of the leading architects of the legislation. In New York City, an Obama economic adviser and Citigroup Inc.'s incoming board chairman, Richard Parsons, called the nation's financial crisis "a death spiral" and said the federal stimulus was the only way to save the economy. "If we don't use taxpayer money to do it, there is no money to do it," Parsons said in a speech to lawyers. "If the financial system collapses, shame on all of us; we'll all have hell to pay." Republicans said the bill was short on tax cuts and contained too much spending, much of it wasteful and unlikely to help laid-off Americans. The party's leader, Rep. John Boehner, said the measure "won't create many jobs, but it will create plenty of programs and projects through slow-moving government spending." A Republican alternative, comprised almost entirely of tax cuts, was defeated, 266-170, moments before the final vote. | |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #23 All of the jobs contained in this bill that our being touted by the Dems are temporary. There's no permanent stimulous that will be spent prior to 2010. Those are CBO numbers, and the Dems currently chair the CBO. This bill sucks donkeys... on ice. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2009-01-29 20:30 |
| #22 It's only worth borrowing to raise your productivity. If you borrow and you don't you are worse off than if you did nothing, as you have the cost of debt servicing. |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles the flatulent 2009-01-29 18:08 |
| #21 Congress passes B.O. There - fixed it for you. You don't think it'll stimulate anything besides even more voter fraud and intimidation for the next election do you? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-01-29 17:56 |
| #20 How the Washington Post breaks down the voting By party | By state/territory | By region | By boomer status | By gender | By astrological sign Think I'm kidding? http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/1/votes/46/?sid=ST2009012803082&s_pos=list |
| Posted by: tu3031 2009-01-29 16:36 |
| #19 The 11 Dems who voted against it. With their reasons... 1. Bobby Bright - Alabama's second district Bright said: "I feel strongly that the American people must have confidence that a recovery package is worth its tremendous price tag. Congress could have done this by simply focusing on investments in infrastructure and targeted tax relief for individuals and small businesses, but this legislation includes billions in additional spending that will have little effect on the economy." 2. Parker Griffith - Alabama's fifth district He said he wanted more funding for projects "such as NASA, water and sewer and transportation" in the fifth district. "We need to jump start our economy and create new jobs, but this bill does not do enough to cut taxes, support small businesses or invest in our research and development programs. I hope that we can work together to improve this bill as it moves through the process so that taxpayers are protected and we do more to invest in the programs and projects important to North Alabama." 3. Allen Boyd - Florida's second district He said: "I have serious concerns that this level of deficit spending without a plan toward fiscal responsibility will only make our economic problems worse. This stimulus package does not address the issues that we know are at least partly responsible for the economic downturn, and that is years of irresponsible fiscal policies rooted in out-of-control spending and borrowing." 4. Walt Minnick - Idaho's first district He said: "Economic stimulus, no matter how much you spend, is only going to work if the US banking and financial system is also functioning." He added that until banks are lending money again, it's unrealistic to expect results. 5. Brad Ellsworth - Indiana's eighth district He said that he supported many of the provisions in the bill and "it's clear that our economy cannot get back on its feet without some help." But "there were far too many provisions that would provide little to no economic stimulus. I hope that the Senate and conference processes will result in an improved final bill." 6. Frank Kratovil - Maryland's first district He said before the vote: "A stimulus package of this unimaginable size needs to be met with the reality that a recovery and reinvestment plan is an extraordinary response to an extraordinary crisis. It is not an opportunity to abandon fiscal discipline in lieu wasteful spending. The plan includes projects to the tune of $200 million to rebuild the National Mall and $50 million in funding for the National Endowment of the Arts. Although these may be admirable causes, they certainly are not emergencies and should not be lumped in with legitimate efforts to strengthen our economy and get people back to work." 7. Collin Peterson - Minnesota's seventh district He said in a statement: "In this difficult economy, many in Congress are rushing to write and pass another massive federal spending bill. In my view, what we're considering will not solve our problems, and may in fact make matters worse." He added that the bill should have focussed on "programs directly resulting in job creation and infrastructure projects, and for unemployment compensation and food stamps". 8. Gene Taylor - Mississippi's 4th district He said: "If anything is in it for the Coast, I don't know. I don't think it's worth the $800-billion price tag. I do think there are lower cost ways to stimulate the economy. For example, the multi-peril bill will pay for itself." 9. Heath Shuler - North Carolina's 11th district He said: "The legislation before the House today contained too much additional spending in areas that will not offer immediate economic stimulus." 10. Paul Kanjorski - Pennsylvania's 11th district He said:"I strongly agree that we must stimulate our economy to help it recover from the current crisis. However, considering the magnitude of this program, is vitally important that the Congress and American people fully understand both the problem and proposed solution. All Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle needed to provide their input, but unfortunately this was not possible." 11. Jim Cooper - Tennessee's fifth district He said: "This bill had too many congressional pet projects and too few of President Obama's plans for jump-starting the economy. I hope the next version of the bill stays closer to its purpose: helping America recover from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.'' |
| Posted by: tu3031 2009-01-29 16:27 |
| #18 When the US Government goes broke, the first state the Government should sell to foreigners to raise cash to survive should be Illinois. |
| Posted by: Vinegar Clens8301 2009-01-29 16:05 |
| #17 positively livid Pretty much sums it up. Or I guess I could say, "scared shitless". |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2009-01-29 15:48 |
| #16 I guarantee ya that Nancy was twisting arms as hard as she could. I'm surprised 11 Dems held out. |
| Posted by: mojo 2009-01-29 12:48 |
| #15 Steve, there's a lot of 'hoping for the best' going on in my mind. But to address your comments, I can't imagine BO pulling the plug on the Bush tax cuts before they expire in 2010. That would be very stupid on his part in that it would be bad for the democrats in 2010. And while he's many things, I don't think stupid is one of them. To be honest, this bill is way better than I would have imagined given the current balance of power and psychological condition of the country. I expected more tax credits for poor people to buy booze and cigarettes and less for people who actually work for a living. Mixed in with all of the bloated wasteful spending there's some decent stuff that will actually help. Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a good bill. It just could have been WAAAAAY worse. Plus, I'm thinking there is enough negative vibes on these massive spending bills that even the RINO's will have some fight in them. Just remember, any changes the GOP can get in the final bill is most likely an improvement. And P2k hit it on the head, a lot of this spending won't be hitting until close to mid-term elections. So, here's to hoping for some change the rest of us can believe in! |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2009-01-29 12:48 |
| #14 “On the final vote, the legislation drew the support of all but 11 Democrats…” That means 36 of the “Blue Dog Democrats” voted in favor of this outrageously bloated bill. When more then three quarters of these so-called “fiscally conservative Democrats” bolt into the night it’s time to shut down that kennel. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2009-01-29 12:42 |
| #13 Just remember, we have mandatory redo in 2 years, unlike parliamentary systems that live for ever till enough momentum builds for payback. The Donks partied in '93 with the Clinton win just like this till the reckoning came due in the '94 elections. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-01-29 12:37 |
| #12 800 + billion on top of the 750 billion bailout. Is any of this inculded in the 1 trillion + projected deficit? Here in Canada some of us are upset that our government is projecting a deficit of 34 billion for 2009 (first projected deficit in about 10 years, our 2008 deficit of about 1.1 billion was not planned ahead of time). If I'm pissed about our government, US Rantburgers must be positively livid about theirs. |
| Posted by: Chemist 2009-01-29 12:18 |
| #11 I dunno, AHM. I'd like to think you're right, but: 1) much of the 'tax cuts' are actually credits -- you have to do as The One says to get them 2) The One still wants to pull the plug on the Bush taxes cuts of 2002 and 2003 3) The remaining RINOs in the Senate may vote yes for 'unity'. Snowe, Specter and McCain are the prime suspects. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-01-29 12:02 |
| #10 A few things, first this bill will look completely different when it comes out of the Senate. Unlike the House, the Senate Dems can't push through anything they like with no Repub support. Second, is this, if you take out the massive amounts of pork the bill is not that bad. Almost all of the stimulus effect this year will come in the form of tax cuts. Check out: Stimulating Waste. It's obvious why the House is doing this, Nancy has all the juice now and she and her cohorts are going to try to push through every socialist wet dream they can while most of America is worried. Good on the Repubs for standing up to her. Now the Senate can hopefully trim the fat and we'll end up with a decent bill. Of course the best bill would be straight tax cuts to businesses and lowering the capital gains taxes with none of the pork. But that ain't going to happen. Another hopeful thing is the balance of power will (please God) shift in two years when alot of the stupid spending starts ramping up. |
| Posted by: AllahHateMe 2009-01-29 11:27 |
| #9 Democrat Anthem http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=__VQX2Xn7tI |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles the flatulent 2009-01-29 11:13 |
| #8 If they couldn't even get Jerry Lewis (Appr.-CA) on board, they really must have locked up the pork in crates marked "for Democratic consumption only". How many squishes are left in the Senate? McCain's got a hard-on for bipartisanship, but even he might be puckering up at the prospect of a united Republican House of Representatives vote like this. It may come down to Specter and the witches of Maine. |
| Posted by: Mitch H. 2009-01-29 09:57 |
| #7 I do believe this bill is eligible to be filibustered. If the Senate Repubs would stick together ... oh who am I kidding? |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-01-29 09:43 |
| #6 Yep, idiots is right. Good on the house repubs, this gives me a little glimmer of hope. Unfortunately, when they do get control they end up getting complacent and legislating like big gov't rinos. Cut taxes, cut spending - that's how you truly rejuvenate the economy - heck, this ain't rocket science, just a little econ 101. Income, corporate, payroll, death tax needs to be cut. Death tax ought to be repealed. Welfare and other entitlements should've been cut big time. The first financial bailout was a scam. Big 3 bailout is another joke. This one looks worse than the other two (if that's possible). I wouldn't have bailed out anyone - the "bailout/stimulus" cure is more likely to be worse for the patient then letting the illness run its course. |
| Posted by: Andy Ulusoque aka Broadhead6 2009-01-29 09:29 |
| #5 My impression of the current financial press commentary is that people are generally admitting it's not a stimulus plan but a pork bill. |
| Posted by: Cynicism Inc 2009-01-29 09:00 |
| #4 I certainly hope this signals a unification of the Republican party effort. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2009-01-29 08:55 |
| #3 Perhaps it will pass the Senate in its current form, but no doubt it will be against Republican opposition, which means the Democratic party will own the results. Since a lot of the provisions won't go into effect for a few years, and since there will be an election in 2010, there is no guarantee that the plan won't be walked back two years from now... which could prove very amusing for those campaigning for the 2012 presidency. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-01-29 08:18 |
| #2 HOw many jobs is that 300mil+ for STD control going to create? Or the 200mil+ for sod on the mall? Compare that to less than 1/5 of the sod amount going for tax breaks to small businesses. You kow, the places where jobs get created? Its pork, its too big, its the worng things, and its too late (a large chunk does nto get spent till 2 years down the road). Lets see, we got into this mess by regulating (distorting the free market with Freddie and Fannie enforced rules), borrowing and spending. And now borrowing even more, and spending even more and regulating even more is going to get us OUT of it? Idiots. Fastest and most direct: Tax Cuts. Anyone remember the Laffer curve, or have the past 20 years erased Reagan? |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2009-01-29 02:01 |
| #1 Congress passes B.O. stimulus plan P.U. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2009-01-29 00:59 |