Obama: Paring Back the Christmas Tree

“Republican criticism, ridicule and demagoguery: $200 million to spiff up the National Mall.”
.
KT-I guess the republican’s think a tax cut and less government will spiff up the mall much better.

Comment in moderation? All I did was link to the Wall Street Journal.

The GOP is hated and distrusted by Americans, has chased everyone under 30 out of their ranks, and has zero interest in sound policy. Why is “intra-party harmony” a worthwhile goal?

“Christmas tree”?
_
is that a phrase that is showing up in GOP emails and press releases, or have you decided on your own to use that derogatory term?
_
I mean, its typical of Villagers, with their six figure incomes, to criticize programs that will create jobs for the poor/disadvantaged citizens of DC from the comfort of their Georgetown (or suburban) domiciles, ain’t it….

pluk:

“christmas tree” has long been a term used by both parties on the Hill with regard to any bill that is loaded up with extraneous stuff. i was hearing it back in the 1980s, when i first got to DC.
.

Yeah thats the same Forbes magazine that named Andrew Sullivan,Tom Friedman and Maureen Dowd “influential liberals” last week. Notice how they describe the provisions of the House bill as “pet projects”. Give me a phucking break. If I find that video of Congressman Miller last night I will link it here because he told the truth in no uncertain terms. We have given tax cuts for the rich a chance over the last 8 years and thats part of why our economy is in the sh!tter right now. Now it’s time to do a stimulus that focuses on stuff that actually works. Personally I hope the House Democratic leadership dump even more infrastructure spending in and raise the bill up to 900 billion just to blow their frikkin minds.

also, i think the real argument here is not necessarily the merit of the programs themselves, but rather, whether they belong in an economic stimulus bill that is already huge and has to pass fast and–as obama has told us again and again–the white house would like to garner bipartisan support.
.
obama is trying to save the economy, but he is also trying to prove that he can change how washington works, which was a basic premise of his campaign.

Elvis-I keep wondering if those us sitting in the cheap seats are really not giving this enough time to play out. Kind of lets see where Obama is going kind of thing and how he adjusts his game plan.

Karen, I know that the term “christmas tree” has been around forever — the question is why did you choose to use the term when referring to provisions of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act that will provide services (family planning) and jobs (National Mall) for poor people?
_
What makes those provisions so “extraneous”? The fact that the GOP criticizes them? The fact that upper-middle class white professionals like yourself get no benefit from them?

Elvis asks: Why is “intra-party harmony” a worthwhile goal?
.
Obama thinks it is a worthy goal, because it is what he ran on. Also, don’t I recall that commenters here complained about Bush’s “my way or the highway” approach to governing?

The ballsiness of the Republicans is impressive. They sound like Obama has to put their plan in effect, instead of recognizing that they’re getting more attention from Obama than they did from Bush.
.
As Jeanne Cummings pointed out yesterday, if you work for a landscape company you’d like jobs too.

pluk: it’s not that spiffing up the mall (or giving more money to the NEA) lacks merit. the question–a legitimate one, i think–is whether this belongs in an urgent economic stimulus package that obama would like to pass with bipartisan support. i think the president is right on this one.

I think KT is right.
Part of the message Obama wants to send is the fact that this bill is URGENT because we’re dealing with a CRISIS.
If he can be seen as making smooth passage a higher priority than any particular spending provision, then he’ll end up in a much better position overall when the smoke clears than he would if the ‘emergency’bill takes two months to get out of conference.

whether they belong in an economic stimulus bill
_
its called the “Recovery and Reinvestment” program for a reason — its not about ‘stimulating’the economy so much as its about recovering from the impact of GOP misrule, and jump-starting infrastructure projects. As long as you keep referring to it as a “stimulus”, rather than acknowledging that “stimulus” is what the Village wants (gotta regain the ground lost in their 401ks and Roth IRAs!) but not what the economy needs right now, you continue to frame the issue in a way most advantageous to the GOP and your peers.
_
and BTW, you don’t think that family planning funding creates jobs? You don’t think that a “shovel ready” program like the National Mall project will create jobs?

Well lets see, the family planning provision was expected to save states ove 400 million over 10 years which presumably would allow them to reallocate that money in their budgets. Sounds stimulative to me.

The resodding of the National Mall would be shovel ready, provide jobs, and would have to be done anyway. Again sounds stimulative to me.

The interesting thing is how unstimulative tax cuts for businesses may be. Exactly what is going to make these business owners hire more people just because they get a tax break? Whats to stop them from just pocketing the difference? Hmmmm inquiring minds want to know.

“Also, don’t I recall that commenters here complained about Bush’s “my way or the highway” approach to governing?”
.
Yes there were and I was one of them. I know this can turn out to be a major tone setting event, but Obama also said during his campaign that this was not going to be easy. The GOP is very, almost too good as an opposition party and to think that Obama is going to get them to surrender after 2 weeks, one bill and a couple dozen pictures is unrealistic in my opinion.

K T
.
I just love your false equivalence but can you name a time over the last 8 years when the Democrats took an ideological stance on any issue and opposed a bill that Bush and the Republicans rammed through?
.
You should remember something, the only times Bush said my way or the highway was when both Dems AND Rethugs were against him. Any other times Dems happily capitulated “for the good of the country”.

gunny: don’t think obama sees it as “surrender.” i think he intends to use his own popularity — and reasonableness (is that a word?) — to make it impossible for them, politically, to oppose this.

KT, why did my comments (one was a second try) go into moderation?

pluk: it’s not that spiffing up the mall (or giving more money to the NEA) lacks merit. the question–a legitimate one, i think–is whether this belongs in an urgent economic stimulus package that obama would like to pass with bipartisan support. i think the president is right on this one
_
but somehow, giving tax breaks to fat cats who have been taking advantage of off-shore tax haves and want to repatriate their money “belongs in an urgent economic stimulus package?” Seriously? Do you REALLY THINK that will create jobs? It won’t. What it will do is increase stock prices — which is great for Villager retirement accounts and other investments, but won’t do squat in terms of helping the economy.

Obama is obviously trying (1) to set tone and public perception of the administration’s governing ideology and (2) to make the Republicans risk a PR disaster in looking like knee-jerk nay-sayers.
-
But there’s a problem in all of this: what if Boehner and Cantor don’t back down? What if they go down swinging on the House vote and in conference. Maybe they’ll look like the bad guys, but they’ll also deflate Obama’s argument that he could have ever accomplished otherwise.

ivb: don’t know, but i will go in and try to liberate it.
.
pluk: as i mentioned, obama has two goals here. one is stimulating the economy. the other is getting republican votes. will it work? i honestly don’t know. but as i said, the place to watch is in the senate, and it will be interesting.

Spit on his face, is all Obama has for playing kissy face with the Right at this point, and the further alienation of the people who put him in power. However, I’m sure this will be portrayed in the media as a failure of the Left.

ivb: nothing from you in moderation, though i did find an old one from that pottymouth sgwhite.

KT: “Also, don’t I recall that commenters here complained about Bush’s “my way or the highway” approach to governing?”
-
Sure, because everything he did lacked empirical founding, and almost all of it polled poorly. Whereas Obama’s trying to get through a stimulus package that economists who have been right about anything in the last 5 years think we urgently need, and that most Americans support (including the contraception spending).
-
The GOP is an extreme, out of touch, ignorant party. That matters, when we’re talking about making policy.
-
Don’t get me wrong: I admire Obama’s style, and I think that reaching out is the right thing to do. But leadership, like parenting, sometimes means saying “no” when small children demand candy/Republicans demand non-stimulative tax cuts.

K Tizzle
.
Maybe you aren’t paying attention but Boehner told his folks to oppose the bill no matter what. The only way the Rethugs will support it is if the whole thing is shifted to tax cuts. They don’t want minor changes. As McCain said on Sunday they want a major rewrite. You see they think they actually won on Nov 4th and since not many media folks will call them out over their bullsh!t and instead focus on President Obama and if he will “compromise” in the sake of “bipartisanship” they see no reason not to go for broke.
.
I will link to the hacktackular Politico to make this point but take it with a grain of salt.
.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0109/Obama_on_the_Hill_contd.html?showall
.

A combative GOP operative writes:

One might consider the possibility that those Limbaugh Republicans will look less like a reflexive opposition party and more like populist defenders of the taxpayers. (They’re not there yet, but darkest before dawn, etc.)
.
What if Son of the Return of TARP (or whatever name they’re giving this so-called recovery bill) doesn’t cause a rain of golden meteors and doesn’t create 25 million-bazillion new goodgreencollarhighpayingjobsforworkingAmericans? What if Obama gets stuck in the weeds defend all the left-wing crap shoved into this thing by his party? (Because you know in that with $50 million for the arts we’re gonna end up [unprintable] with a Federal Performance Art grant or some such nonsense.)
.
There are worse places to be than not playing me-to with the Democrats. Didn’t we learn our lesson on trying to outspend the Democrats? (How’d that drug benefit pay out for us politically, eh?)

I’m just wondering how divergent McConnell’s leadership in the Senate and Boehner’s leadership in the House is going to be over these next few years, given how relatively dissimilar their respective Republican caucuses are. Are they going to just play good cop-bad cop for the next for years, or will midterm elections ultimately sort out for them which of their approaches is working, and which is not?

the problem, Karen, is that you present as a worthy cause pursuing GOP votes by taking off “ornaments” that create jobs and help the poor and adding “ornaments” for fat cats.
_
its positively Broderific!

“don’t think obama sees it as “surrender.”
.
KT-I wasn’t suggesting that he saw it as surrender. Poor word choice on my part.

K Tizzle
.
I think grown folks should be able to cuss, even in polite company, unless its demeaning. Sorry.

I’m not trying to be a smart-a**, but why is it a fail on Obama’s part if Republicans don’t vote for this bill?
Obama has met with them 3 times!
Republicans complained about the Family Life provision, so Obama dropped it.
Republicans complained about the money for the National Mall, so Obama drops that as well.

Obama is reaching out… It’s the Republican’s that are not reaching back. They are playing Politics right now when the country needs this package. WHY ARE THEY NOT BEING CALLED OUT ON THIS CRAP?!
This is a serious matter and Obama was right in his inauguration speech when he said it’s time to put away “childish things”.
The Republicans are being childish right now.

interesting email i got from a democratic source, which explains why obama has the leverage here, and more than you guys seems to be giving him credit for having. (will have to see if this ends up in moderation):
.
ok, over a 48 hour period when 100,000 job layoffs have been announced, hill republicans have decided to take a stand against the stimulus. random fact points that feel relevant:

obama’s approval rating is about 70%;

congressional approval is still around 20%;

democrats still have a 9 point lead in generic identification;

the public approves of the stimulus plan by a very large margin – the numbers vary with the wording of the poll question, but it’s at least a plus 40%;

obama is the most talented political figure of our generation – boehner and mcconnell are, uh, less talented.

obama’s got the megaphone, they got dick;

republicans are trying to use fiscal discipline as their excuse for opposition, but they pissed away that former strength over bush’s presidency;

republicans’ notion of stimulus is tax cuts – but not tax cuts for those of modest means – that is, again, they’re supporting only tax cuts for the wealthier among us – that is, their economic prescription is more bush economics;

obama has done everything reasonable, and more, to move toward non-bi-partisanship. the overwhelming impression he’s leaving for voters is one of reasonableness and accommodation;

what am i missing? the public is clamoring for washington to do something, anything. and hill republicans are offering only obstruction. how’d you like to be a republican member from michigan or indiana or ohio? it’s like a death wish, an affirmative move to make itself the minority party for another decade.

something about open hands and clenched fists.

KT-That’s interesting and thanks for sharing. I just wish the republicans were actually confronted in a consistant manner over these points and the press brought them up on their own. But that’s not generally what happens.

K Tizzle
.
You don’t get it. WE AGREE WITH THE EMAILER! Thats why its so nonsensical for President Obama to be trying to appease the unappeasable. If they don’t like the bill, phuck em, and then when their constituents see that they would rather play political games than protect their livelihoods then they will suffer the blowback. By continuing to “compromise” with those ass holes he gives them credibility that they shouldn’t rightly have.

Nice, Karen, thanks for printing that email. And get that Dem source on TV, which is all-GOP all the time!
-
More relevant-feeling facts:
-
Job Approval / Disapproval
.
Obama: 67 / 29
.
Pelosi: 39 / 37
.
Reid: 33 / 41
.
McConnell: 29 / 46
.
Boehner: 21 / 47
-
America loves Obama, is divided on Congressional Dem leaders, and hates Republicans. We should reach out to those guys, sure, but tell them to sod off when they do things that make no sense. And the pouty GOP deserves spankings, not cookies.

sgwhite:
.
you completely miss the point of that email. the emailer, i think, makes a strong case that all this anxiety you guys are feeling over the gop running roughshod over obama does not appear to be warranted, and that obama’s nonconfrontational stance (so far) is paying off. he seems to think obama is letting them dig themselves into a very deep political hole.

But the point is that Obama needs to make more concessions than are even reasonable, because the optics here need to be decisive: the administration offered Republicans everything under the sun, and they still chose darkness.

sgwhite:
.
here are the key sentences:
.
.how’d you like to be a republican member from michigan or indiana or ohio? it’s like a death wish, an affirmative move to make itself the minority party for another decade.
.

KT:
.
Thank you so much for responding to commentary.

sgw, Yes, we do agree with the e-mailer. I couldn’t have said it better than he did. But, I’m also remembering during the campaign when I wanted Obama to come out swinging against cr*p that McCain was pushing and he didn’t. The less he confronted as I would have wanted, the better he did. I want to see how this plays out doing it his way. Listening to all the Repubs, I can’t see how they can convince people that we should do more of what got us into this mess.

It’s like Obama is offering the Republicans free sex, and they’re all like, “No, thanks, we’d rather not get laid again for the next decade.”

Direct jobs creation by hiring people to clean up DC is more effective than indirect jobs creation through tax cuts.
.
Much of the Forbes article reminds me of this post by David Kurtz at TPM yesterday. Conservatives are pushing the idea that Barack Obama’s version of bipartisanship is mindless triangulation, and that it’s all the fault of the Democrats.
.
In previous years, having 2 or 3 Democratic Senators vote in favor of a bill was enough to call Republican sponsored bills bipartisan. What will the standard be here?
.
I think lots of people are concerned that Barack Obama is not using the leverage he obviously has. If the compromising is just about done, and those Max Baucus tax cuts are focused on EITC expansion rather than upper income rates, then this bill can still be effective.

obama has done everything reasonable, and more, to move toward non-bi-partisanship. the overwhelming impression he’s leaving for voters is one of reasonableness and accommodation;
what am i missing?
_
what she is missing is that Obama is allowing the GOP to represent itself as being “reasonable”, rather than portraying them as the petty obstructionists that they are. This is a huge mistake, because it legitimizes the underlying rationale behind the GOP criticism — and makes the GOP’s “childish” behavior seem reasonable and rational.
_
Obama (and the country) would be far better off making Boehner a national embarrassment by doing stuff like pointing out that there is no provision in the stimulus bill for “condoms”, and that what he is referring to is a provision to allow medicaid funds to be used for family planning services. Make Boehner and the GOP leadership the issue, instead of allowing family planning services for those at the bottom of the economic ladder to be a political football.

K Tizzle
.
If they aren’t running roughshod then why has he pulled to items from the stimulus bill? Mind you I don’t necessarily think they are, BUT perception many times become reality and you can’t convince me that the Rethugs don’t see those two moves as wins.

ivb:

campaign was indeed instructive. the stupidest story i wrote, in 2007, was one about how obama wasn’t going anywhere because, in the view of smart democratic strategists, he wouldn’t confront hillary. over the next year, gibbs and axelrod rarely missed an opportunity to tease me about it.

to=two

If anyone cares, what I was trying to post that went off into the ether was a chart in the WSJ showing the state breakdown of projects from the Democratic House bill.
.
You can find it at WSJ.com on the front page there is a line of Quick Links and if you click Stimulus, the top story has a link headed Graphic, State by state analysis. Alaska and Texas do well.

“what she is missing is that Obama is allowing the GOP to represent itself as being “reasonable”, rather than portraying them as the petty obstructionists that they are.”

This is just wrong. They’re only “reasonable” if, after being so thoroughly accommodated, they actually play ball. They’re not going to play ball. They’re going to make demands, Obama will concede, and they will then make more demands. So Obama looks reasonable; the House Republicans look like…the petty obstructionists that they are.

key passage from stupidstory:
.
That’s why the campaign pledges that Obama will resist the inevitable calls of the political class for more conflict and will engage in what his chief political strategist, David Axelrod, euphemistically calls the “vigorous comparative processes” on its own timetable and in its own way. “There is a bloodlust out there. People want us to eviscerate her, if for nothing else than the sport of it,” says Axelrod. “But how we draw the distinction is important, and we’re not going to get pushed into gratuitous exchanges to satisfy the peanut-gallery pundits.”

I’ve got to go do some work. will check in here later.

ivb
.
And guess what, yesterday Kay Baily Hutchinson out and out LIED on MSNBC when she said she opposed the bill because nobody knew where the money to the states was going or if it was broken down by population. That same chart has been published in USAToday also. Just goes to show that they are NOT negotiating either with the public or with the Dems in good faith.
.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/27/gop-knee-jerk-stimulus/

This is the point, and Hutchinson demonstrated this: Republicans aren’t obstructionists for wanting to block family planning and Mall renovation provisions from an emergency stimulus package; they’re obstructionists for wanting to block family planning and Mall renovation provisions from an emergency stimulus package with the full knowledge that they don’t planning on supporting the package regardless.

I say let this play out. I’m unhappy about the family planning decision, because it’s such obviously good public policy; unwanted pregnancies are expensive and bad.
.
Any proposal that involved direct expenditure on public works is going to inevitably be labeled with the pork or the Christmas tree image by somebody somewhere.
.
But I don’t think any of these decisions are in the least bit final. If he makes concessions in the House that the Republicans demand, and they still act to obstruct, well there’s the Senate version and conference.
.
Obama knows his Senate colleagues better that I do. But this mindless obstruction in the midst of a crisis was absolutely predictable from someone watching this at home. The Republicans have evinced no concern for good policy-making, or for the national good, beyond the top decile of income earners and wealth holders. So, we have to see how this ends up. The sausage making part is unpleasant to watch, but, especially given his track record, I’d really rather wait until there’s a bill on his desk before assessing Obama’s performance.
.

sgw, thanks for the link. (OT, just think KBH was one of those touted for McCain VP) The one in the WSJ is different and more detailed. They got the info via several sources and give per capita amounts as well.
.
Now I think that allowing the Repubs to spout their endless nonsense may be a very good idea. The people that casually hear it will simply see it as obstruction.

There is no way that the GOP comes out looking good on this. Americans want action, not obstructionism. Definitely a short-term win for Obama.
.
The problem is that I don’t really care about short-term political victories. I would prefer a better stimulus bill even if Obama’s approval drops to 60% rather than scoring cheap political points that might get Obama to 75% or 80%.
.
I actually like Obama’s tactic of appearing reasonable and open-minded and letting the GOP slap away the out-stretched arm. The big problem is that Obama started by negotiating against himself. He introduced a stimulus package that was already crafted to gain bipartisan support. He didn’t get any. Then he watered down the stimulus with “tax breaks to fat cats who have been taking advantage of off-shore tax havens”. Bipartisan support now? No.
.
Everyone knows that Obama has the megaphone. Everyone knows that Obama has the leverage. So why the GOP is getting substantive concessions when they aren’t bringing anything to the table?
.
obama is the most talented political figure of our generation
.
Obama needs to read less about Lincoln and more about LBJ.

Obama’s need to be loved by right-wing extremists, is a slap in the face to those who gave him a big enough win, to not need the Right. Obviously, giving the Democrats a big majority is redundant.

. They’re going to make demands, Obama will concede, and they will then make more demands. So Obama looks reasonable; the House Republicans look like…the petty obstructionists that they are.
_
wake up.
_
everytime that Obama makes a concession, it reinforces the idea that the GOP is being reasonable (why make a concession to an unreasonable demand?). If/when Obama finally says “enough is enough”, the “reasonable” GOP will point out how “partisan” and “obdurant” Obama is being — and because the GOP has already been established as “reasonable”, that criticism will be promulgated by the villagers.
_
By going after the family planning provision — and especially by misrepresting it as being about condoms — the GOP showed that it was all about being unreasonable. The right way to deal with that kind of tactic is to immediately expose it; the wrong way is to treat it as legitimate.

sz: KT, Thank you so much for responding to commentary. It’s more than responding, it’s active participation. Someone in a previous thread noted that KT “gets it” and is an example of the new age of journalism. You’re a survivor KT!
.
I would add something to the thread, but it is too much fun to just “listen.” Great discussion.

“everytime that Obama makes a concession, it reinforces the idea that the GOP is being reasonable (why make a concession to an unreasonable demand?).”

Again, this is just wrong. Obama doesn’t come across as if he’s acknowledging “valid” points that the Republicans are introducing; he comes across as someone who recognizes that punching a kid in the face because he won’t stop crying over candy isn’t your only option, and it probably isn’t even your best one.

Otherwise, your sense of Obama’s ideal diplomacy with the Republicans is remarkably comparable to Bush’s sense of diplomacy with any country that wasn’t us.

Yglesias offers a Question to Ponder Will the press let conservatives get away with simultaneously claiming that we can’t afford large new temporary deficit spending but can afford large new permanent tax cuts? Actually, there’s scarcely any need to ponder. Just prepare yourself to be upset.

I am urging all Americans to oppose any type of stimulus, recovery or revitalization bill. We don’t need it. All we need to do is balance the budget, restore interest rates to a reasonable level, and decide on the necessary changes to remove tax loop holes and properly structure our financial system.
-
The clarity in that alone would spur market investment and restore confidence in American leadership. So, stand with me!! No more tax cuts. No more spending. Just balance the budget and all will be well in time.

charity
.
Just turn to any random news show right now or some time today. Every single talking head is painting it as though President Obama made the right call because those projects weren’t really stimulative which is the exact opposite of the truth. Many of them are throwing the word “pork” around like they have strings attached to them that connect to John Boehner’s fingers. Now maybe to YOU it doesn’t seem that way, but it is for damn sure not for a lack of trying by the Rethugs and their Villager friends.

bryanfromhouston
.
I don’t know if thats snark, but if it isn’t you need to add one thing to your formula of no tax cuts, no more spending and balancing the budget
.
Higher taxes for all during a recession
.
Good luck with that.

Obama campaigned for change – but just in case he brought his Political Oracle to Washington. The Political Parlor games are in full play – and Obama is the master. ……….

http://thefiresidepost.com/2009/01/28/political-parlor-games-and-obamas-oracle/

I, for one, disagree about the family planning issue. I wholeheartedly support it and hope that Democrats address the issue in the near future.
.
Having said that, the most important debates that we face are positive economic ones: What works? What policies will stimulate the economy the most? Will tax cuts stimulate the economy more than direct spending by the government?
.
The Democrats, and liberals generally, have the difficult task of pushing back against a couple decades of voodoo economic thought that has taken root as conventional wisdom in the GOP and among much of the beltway commentariat. It makes no sense to add to this difficult task by simultaneously engaging in normative economic debates like: Should we spend money on family planning?
.
While the GOP may disingenuously attack family planning funding on stimulus grounds, everybody knows that the real opposition is based upon normative values. The GOP is opposed to family planning funding, period. And liberals don’t support such funding for its stimulating effects. They value it as social policy. That is an important debate to have, but Democrats would be best served by not having it right now.

sgr1
.

While the GOP may disingenuously attack family planning funding on stimulus grounds, everybody knows that the real opposition is based upon normative values. The GOP is opposed to family planning funding, period.

.
Its actually just a red herring for their base. They don’t really give a sh!t about the family planning part of the bill. But they need something to point to in order to be able to criticize and the family planning part serves 2 goals. One they can paint it as not being stimulative, and two they can make their base believe they oppose it on moral grounds. Its amazing how they sell this kind of crap to the people who vote for them.

sgw: Fair enough, but “the base” cares because of social values reasons and not because of economics.

What sgw #13 (or #63) said. Every last word of it.

The family planning item bothers me more than the Mall renovation, because of what plukasiak said – the GOP was allowed to frame it in their usual stupid terms. If they oppose health care for poor women, let them say so.
-
That said – almost any kind of direct government spending could have a stimulative effect (as I understand it). But that doesn’t mean that every worthwhile project should be in the stimulus package. So some negotiation over the provisions is reasonable. (Of course the GOP is negotiating in bad faith, but the principle stands.)
-
I think Obama’s approach is this: OK, you objected to these two provisions, and we took them out. Now do have anything constructive to offer? Will you pass the bill?

from the POV of a newbie just stumblin’in…
.
Much of this discussion seems an intellectual exercise by those with too much time on their hands. I voted for BHO and he is proceeding exactly as I expected and hoped he would. I also expect the GOP conservatives to follow their philosophical roots and stake out the territory they have. Neither am I surprised that Boehner and company are attempting to pressure the removal of many of the social program funding earmarks. I, for one, agree with them. This legislation should not be filled with social program funds that do not directly provide food, clothing, housing, education, and basic health insurance for those in need.
.
Perhaps you could make the case that family planning services provide jobs. If you have data you can reference to clarify to what degree, that would be helpful. The family agency board on which I served for many years had a staff of 7. I am told they have laid off two. Yet I don’t confuse their need, which is real, with the aims of this legislation: to stimulate economic activity by investing in projects which can both modernize our physical infrastructure and dramatically alter our energy direction while creating short-term and long-term employment in the millions.
.
My chief concern are those mentioned in Dan Gerstein’s Forbes article. I would greatly prefer increased investment in mass transit and making the leap to a digital grid with incentives for a new generation of appliance and construction standards. I don’t think Sommers is wrong. We just have different priorities. I’m willing to sacrifice some immediacy for longer range benefits.
.
But, hey, that’s just me. At any rate, I want to encourage the President to continue to set the standard with his new behavior irrespective of its immediate legislative results. For the cultural results both here and abroad will be significant.
.
FWIW, I am a professional family man, active in my community, lifelong liberal, ex-McGovern campus director, John Anderson volunteer, Obama supporter who finds himself unemployed going on 8 months. Emergency savings gone. My current world view is through the window of my study where the snow falls heavily making my econ-neutron bombed southeastern Michigan world seem momentarily alright. May god bless.

here are the key sentences:
“how’d you like to be a republican member from michigan or indiana or ohio? it’s like a death wish, an affirmative move to make itself the minority party for another decade.”
.
That’s the key part of all this, KT? This isn’t campaign time this is governing time. Everyday more people out of work, businesses closing, homes lost and THIS is the important?
.
I thought I was cynical.

I agree with wvng: KT rocks. It’s about being accountable, rather than throwing down your opinions from on high and then hiding from criticism, right or wrong.
‘
Hey, KT, mayhap you could give lessons to the Repugs?
‘
I see the Dems as Sisyphus with his rock: they can’t win, regardless. But what really puzzles me – galls? – is why the Repugs have the high ground all the time, even when they’re wrong? Why is everything for the Repugs to lose, while the Dems are Cinderella before finding a fairy god-mother?
‘
Wait a sec: people of privilege, party of rich snobs. Ok, a light clicks on. But, then, why do “real Americans” support these airholes? Why do the media outlets enable these posturing blow-hards? Ah, wait: rich snobs own media outlets. Ok, so where’s the media outlet for “We the People”?

greentraveler
.
The family planning portion of the bill is stimulative in several different ways. If you are talking the biggest fiscal stimulation its from the fact that the states that recieve the funding will save according to estimates over $400 million dollars over the next 10 years. As you probably know states have to balance their budgets yearly. For that reason many of them are having to lay off workers in different public sectors. By having that money allocated that means they can not only keep from having to fire people but also in some instances actually bring people in. Shorter explanation is it lessens the blow of the economic crisis on states which saves jobs.

sgwhiteinfla,
-
I remain supremely unconvinced of the need for any type of stimulus and/or recovery bill. I think that BHO, the Republican and Democratic party, and most economists are wrong.
-
The fundamental problem with the economy is a lack of confidence. That lack of confidence is a result of lack of regulation and lack of enforcement of the existing regulation.
-
My argument is that Republicans have been advocating tax cuts for 30 years! And we are still where we are today. The Democrats have been wanting more spending for nearly as long. Pardon me if I remain unconvinced by the efficacy of another set of those programs.
-
Now, I am not arguing for tax increases. That is not what I said at all or meant to imply. What I am arguing for a clarification in what the rules are and then equitable enforcement of those rules. Nothing more…nothing less. The market will then take care of itself. Businesses, people and economies will most naturally get to productive uses.
-
That said, if the government then wants to pass a bill to cover the costs of a new electrical grid, upgrade and modernization of air traffic, enhanced initiatives in mass transit, and spur enhanced energy efficiency and diversification then I encourage the government to knock our socks off. Nobody can argue that even $1 trillion spent on those initiatives would not be beneficial for the country. Just don’t call it stimulus or economic recovery. Because that is not what it is. They can call it the Modernization of America Plan or whatever.

sgw: There is no question that the family planning portion CAN be defended on economic grounds. But that wasn’t WHY it was in there and it wasn’t WHY it was removed.
.
Counter-factual: Imagine if the GOP, urged on by the NRA, proposed a stimulus package that included subsidizing the purchase of handguns by inner-city residents. I think that we could all agree that such a stimulus would be opposed by many liberals despite the undeniable stimulating effect.
.
There is no reason for the Democrats to get sucked into a debate over social values at this point.

bryanfromhouston
.
If you want to balance the budget right now you have to raise taxes. Thats just a fact. There isn’t enough “stuff” to cut out of the budge and even if there was it wouldn’t take effect for years. As for it all coming down to confidence, go tell that to the 2 million people who got laid off. I am sure they can pay their bills and feed and clothe their kids with “confidence”

Arrgh mateys! Th’problem be, th’President may have a megaphone, but so do th’Republicans, an’they be usin’theirs right heartily all over th’MSM. An’, they be appearin’t’be th’ones drivin’th’terms o’the recovery package, an’th’President be appearin’t’be bucklin’t’their demands. We be wantin’bipartisanship, but more, we be wantin’strong leadership. Allowin’th’republicans t’look like they still be th’ones in charge be right confusin’t’th’national crew, don’t ye be thinkin’? A stronger hand be needed here against th’mutinyin’crew a tryin’t’wrest control o’the rudder.
.
An’why don’t we be callin’th’package a RECOVERY package instead o’a STIMULUS package? We done stimulated th’fat cats already an’look how that be a workin’. Ye can give all th’shots o’speed ye want, but it ain’t going t’cure th’scurvy, mates! Fer that, ye be needin’time, and lots o’vitamin C.
.
Th’point I be tryin’t’make be, th’blasted MSM continue t’be a treatin’th’wingnuts as if they be still captains o’th’ship. Wha’they be needin’is t’be treated like the scupper-scrapers they done become. Th’problem also be th’democrats no be knowin’how t’package their product fer mass consumption, if ye know wha’I mean.

sqr1
.
Unfortunately you can’t come up with a way that your imaginary gun subsidizing would help to stimulate the economy that was beneficial in the way the family planning portion of the bill was. Now if people want to make it a social issue so be it. But the people making that argument are in the underwhelming minority. At some point the results of elections SHOULD matter. And not being drawn into that silly argument should have been one of those times.

I saw a guy on CNN today (in the bank) in a bowtie hand-wringing over deficit spending. What still boggles me is the fact that the Republicans continue to pretend that there’s a difference between cutting taxes and increasing expenditures in it’s effect on federal debt. As KT’s e-mailer points out, the idea that Republicans represent fiscal responsibility is officially a joke and they really aren’t fooling anyone who matters.
.
I still think Obama is playing this just fine.

I know that political decisions now depend on the Senate repugs, but if they decide to act fundamentally like the HousePugs, then Tim F offers a useful Deep Thought:
.
If Republicans plan to deliver exactly zero votes for Obama’s stimulus bill, then why does the bill still have compromises in it? Screw them. Put the family planning stuff back in, take the tax cuts out. If we know for sure that passing a crappy bill won’t win any more votes then just pass a better bill. They won’t scream any louder. The political cost won’t be any greater. Also, and pay attention because this is the important part, a better bill is more likely to succeed. There is literally no longer any reason to weaken the bill with provisions that only exist because otherwise baby Rick Santorum might cry.

sgwhiteinfla,
-
I am not arguing for an immediate effort to balance the budget. What I am calling for is an effort to bring about some financial discipline and a realization that the American standard of living is far in excess of our needs.
-
Many of us can live quite well with far less. Let us being the (I realize painful) recognition that we have too many cars, houses, clothes, excess food, etc. If we all lived well within our means we would have plenty of money left over to feed the less fortunate, provide health care for children.
-
My call for sacrifice is not without compassion. Far from it…the call is made to aid our fellow man in an act of compassion. We cannot spend our way to prosperity nor we can tax cut it. My argument is that I am calling for a rebuke of the idea that just because we are the most powerful, prosperous and wealthy nation that we must act petulantly with our resources.

Okay — I get it and I support Obama’s effort but he needs to at the very least explain that when he is will to make concessions that he is doing so even though the GOP description of these items is erroneous. For example:
.
Obviously, family planning is a worthwhile investment because it will save states over 400 million in ten years but to further a bipartisan approach the Democrats are willing to postpone this until we start our discussion on health care when we are looking for ways to reduce costs.
.
He needs to do this because otherwise Dems will get really stubborn rather than let them GOP beat them up when they are in the majority.
.
I hope this happens because if the Dems appear to be fractious, they could end up like the Democratic majority under Clinton which is what I think Obama is trying to avoid.

Here’s a crappy “gem” about this very issue from today’s WaPo chat (Kane actually blames Obama for including tax cuts in the first place):
.
New York, N.Y. : C’mon, Paul. You’re spouting hte GOP line, and you know it. Everybody knows that infrastructure projects could easily be expedited, that the economy will need additional infusions for years to come and that the real reason for shunning infrastructure was to make room for the GOP’s pet tax cuts. You honestly thought everything in the bill was going to be “shovel ready”? Really, Paul?
.
Paul Kane: obama’s the one who pushed for all these tax cuts. There are $275 billion worth of tax cuts, and 60% of those come in the Make Work Pay provision, which was a central plank of the Obama campaign. I ain’t spoutting anyone’s line here, folks.

As a former Rep. who saw the light when Newt introduced his “Contract for America” bullsh!t, I too would like to see the GOP slapped silly. However, in basketball terms, I believe Obama is planning on playing a two half game. He may let the GOP stay a little close in the first half by wearing themselves out, but the second half will be all Obama.

If Mitch McConnell and John Boehner don’t have a megaphone, why are they on my tv so much?

Obama plays rope-a-dope better than anyone I have ever seen. I think he is brilliant and thinks several moves ahead of anyone else. I would hate to play chess with the man.

The GOP opposes the family planning provisions because then there would be less poor kids to deny health coverage to when they oppose SCHIP or programs like it. Also, those unwanted kids mean job security for prison guards.
.
I wonder if KT is even aware that she reflexively defends a classist status quo. As pointed out, she as the rest of the press, is willing to write off a shovel ready project like the sodding of the mall as waste but will not address more tax cuts for the wealthy, who are doing just fine, and the corporations that have been playing tax haven games. Is it even fair to expect that someone who’s lived most of their lives in a provincial Beltway bubble, who sees elections as parlor games, could for a second empathize with someone who NEEDS that re-sodding job to survive as opposed to the fat cat who might need to give up their second summer home in the Hamptons? Probably not…but it still pisses me off.

bryanfromhouston: Paul Krugman was on KUOW this morning, and said that consumer confidence is part of the equation, but is not most of it, because consumers have been living beyond their incomes for years. According to him, the housing bubble and the unregulated “shadow banks” are the main culprits. Of course he’s an economist, so what does he know.
-
(Snark aside, it’s all over my head.)

bryanfromhouston, you are correct, but furthermore, our suburban infrastructure is no longer feasible, at least not without a big investment in mass transit systems. The “American Way of Life” is over folks. Totally, totally over.

ART! Be ye listenin’t’KUOW – THE KUOW, laddie? Meself, I be preferrin’KPLU…but t’each ‘is own, mate .

Bryan – th’problem be, if we all start t’livin’wi’in our means, then none o’us be a buyin’much, then th’economy continues t’languish in th’doldrums. We be dependin’on each o’us t’somehow find a means o’livin’beyond our means in order t’keep th’economy afloat, me hearty. It be th’proverbial catch 22, ‘r whatever th’seafarin’equivalent be…

Blast I be hatin’this annoyin’format o’multiple pages an’resettin’back t’th’original after postin’! Me poor thumb be right frozen from scrollin’t’th’point where I be able t’advance again!

demwoman: Usually KBCS in the morning for their jazz shows (speaking of community colleges…), and KPLU for Ken Wiley on Sunday and Fresh Air on weeknights, and KUOW for the talky stuff.
-
There’s a lot of great radio in our area!

[...] pick up a few votes from vulnerable Republicans, for reasons Marc Ambinder (evidently parroting Democratic talking points) [...]

This is not an “economic stimulus.” Not at all.

Applying the same loose monetary, loose credit, big-spending policies that got us into this mess, in order to “fix it,” is Einstein’s definition of insanity.

Why doesn’t Obama, the Democrats and his supporters want to see the economy recover? This proposal will do no such thing.

Please, enough with the partisan bickering and holding onto childish things (like neo-Keynesianism). Go back to the drawing board.

Frankly, it would be better if Congress printed up and used that trillion and just cut a big fat check for every household in America. The people will spend the money more wisely than the government ever could.

http://www.cato.org/fiscalreality

Ah yes, the Cato Institute, the institution that signed off on all the fiscal policies that got us into this mess in the first place. So, more tax cuts? Lower capital gains? Privatize? Let’s invest social security in the stock market? Move production overseas to lower the cost of products for the American consumer? Yeah, whatever dude.

Cato did not sign off on Bush’s big spending adventures. Bush, for all intents and purposes, is a fiscal liberal. Obama is a continuum.

What do you suggest? Tax hikes on small businesses and working families during a recession? A brilliant plan. Squeeze the little guy even more.

And if increases in federal spending = economic health, why are things getting worse? We have had bailout after bailout, and none of them have done squat. Just wait until the commercial real estate sector crashes in a few months, and after that the bond market. And after that, hyperinflation. You ain’t seen nothing yet, baby.

http://mises.org/

Fact of the matter is, the American people are being robbed in broad daylight, again, to benefit our ruling class and the politically-connected (corporations, special interests, bankers).

America will wake up soon and realize that both the Democrats and Republicans are Corporatists, hell bent on destroying the middle class and turning us into government-dependent serfs.

“The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its REIGN by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
–President Abraham Lincoln

Next election, vote for Real Change™. Vote third party.

It may be that I’m giving the republicans more credit than they actually deserve, but could their opposition to the $200 million to spruce up the national mall have a psychological basis? After all, it’s not THEIR mall anymore and by not having it re-sodded and spiffed up, it will look just a little shabby and past it’s prime. This spring and summer every time the cameras show the mall it will show brown grass, bare spots and it will look like it’s on the decline. In Washington, appearances are everything. By letting the mall look bad, it might be equated with an overall decline because the democrats are running everything now. It just seems petty enough to be something that the republican brain trust might think up.