Obama Coming To Conference?

Up to now, President Obama’s staff has mostly dodged questions about what role the White House will play in the conference committee negotiations between the House and the Senate over the stimulus bill.  On the flight out to Elkhart, White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked if the White House wants a person in the room during the negotiations. “We want a package to get done quickly and to the President’s desk,” he answered.

But during his town hall meeting here in Indiana, Obama himself tipped his hand on one area that he wants to press conferees to reinsert in the final bill. “The Senate version cut a lot of these education dollars,” Obama said, adding that he wanted to see that money returned to the final bill. [UPDATE: Here is the full Obama quote: "The Senate version cut a lot of these education dollars; I would like to see some of it restored. And over the next few days, as we're having these conversations, we should talk about how we can make sure that we're investing in education, because that's what's going to keep companies investing right here in the United States over the long term."]

At the same town hall, Obama offered one of his strongest defenses of using the stimulus package to acheive specific policy goals, something that has been criticized by Republican lawmakers.

Now, I’ll be honest with you. Some of the critics of the plan have said that’s pork. I don’t understand their criticism. Their basic argument is, well, that’s — you’re trying to make policy instead of just doing short-term stimulus. Well, my whole attitude is, if we’re going to spend billions of dollars to create jobs anyway, then why wouldn’t we want to create jobs in things like clean energy that create a better economic future for us over the long term? That’s just — that’s common sense to me.

The context for Obama’s continued assertiveness–which began last Tuesday–is a new Gallup poll, released today, that clearly shows, as Gallup puts it, that “Obama has upper hand in stimulus fight.” While 67 percent of Americans approve of the way he has handled the stimulus, only 31 percent approve of the way congressional Republicans have handled it.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty No. 2), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay-marriage advocates — as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    The Village fears nothing more than the application of common sense to policy matters. Common sense cuts the defense budget in half. Common sense legalizes marijuana. Common sense yanks out the tax cuts (http://bit.ly/kugU) from the stimulus bill. Common sense invests borrowed money in physical capital, rather than spending it as current income, as in tax cuts.
    .
    Common sense. Bizarre idea.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    The Republicans are also looking at net loss of 4-6 seats in 2010. I don’t think obstruction will improve those prospects.

  • sneezeguard

    Definitely concur with Obama on this part of the Stimulus plan. This is not a short term economic problem, this is a crisis that may provide the oppurtunity to make some very important changes in the way we do things.
    For a long time a lot of political players have put off things (from everything to investing in our schools, to the environment, to basic infrastructure like roads and bridges) because it wasn’t a painful enough time to make the call and it could be put off till later.
    We’re at later now folks.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Isn’t ironic that the very same people who were tut-tutting the loudest over Obama’s ‘bitter’ remarks are the very same ones who continue to be absolutely tone-deaf over what ‘average Americans’ actaully care about or want?
    .
    George Gallup ventures forth where David Broder fears to tread!

  • studentforlife

    Thank God! Interesting how the “contraception” money got so much press, but the cut in education funding got hardly any. I suppose one doesn’t really need an education if you’re busy popping babies out…

  • Cliff

    So over the weekend I found out that one of my teacher friends will no longer be a teacher after the school year ends, because Phoenix is cutting something like $2 million from the school budget.
    .
    And that’s when I realized – the only friends of mine who have secure jobs are in the Air Force.
    Which pretty much puts the lie to the whole “the government has never created jobs” story the Right is vomiting forth.

  • pierogielunaire

    Obama is talking like a man who knows he is dealing from a position of strength, which he is. It’s amazing how the pun-dorks continue to impose artificial “balance” on the stimulus debate as though somehow the Republicans are gaining the upper hand. We saw this over and over during the presidential debates. Pundits would call it a draw or give the edge to McCain and polling would consistently show that Obama had cleaned McCain’s clock as far as the public was concerned.
    .
    Reid is to blame for the situation as well. He should dare the GOP to filibuster this bill.

  • sqr1

    My only hope is that Obama has the guts to force Reid to force the GOP to filibuster this thing.
    .
    There is a lot to not like about a “stimulus package” that is “loaded up like a Christmas tree” with tax cuts and handouts to defense contractors, but it would go down easier if I was treated to the sight of the GOP mounting a masochistic and fruitless effort to derail the thing.

  • iwasindependent

    Question- After the bill comes out of conference, does it get debated all over again, or does it go to a straight up or down vote? I’m only asking to see if cloture is relevant to a bill post-conference.

  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    Yeah, it’s pretty amazing. It’s like Obama is on this whole other plane of existence almost. More than anything else, it reminds me of watching a good screen play develop in the NFL. The QB drops back, he’s running for his life from the rushers, then all of a sudden, BOOM! 5 yard pass to the guy they weren’t even watching, 40 yards run after catch for a TD. Amazing is about the only word I can come up with for it.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    ************Attention*************************8
    .
    Most of yall know I have been throwing Harry Reid under the bus about not forcing a filibuster on this bill. Well it turns out a filabuster wouldn’t do any good. Last night I found this article from Kagro X formerly of dkos now at his own place CongressMatters which explains that because of a point of order related to deficit spending no matter what this bill has to get 60 votes in the Senate. So even if Reid forced a filabuster, in order to get the final version passed you still have to get 60 votes. It would have helped if the MSM would have pointed it out but they didn’t. But thank goodness for bloggers especially astute ones like Kagro X
    .
    http://www.congressmatters.com/storyonly/2009/2/7/161443/9275/436/583

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    After the bill comes out of conference, does it get debated all over again, or does it go to a straight up or down vote? I’m only asking to see if cloture is relevant to a bill post-conference.
    .
    Gets debated all over again, in principle. But in practice, the bill will take a form that will pass.

  • spob

    Problem is, guys, that if this $1T package doesn’t work, then there are going to be a lot of questions asked. It’s not even sure that it will stimulate. All of the interest costs will be wealth leaving our nation. And the CBO isn’t so hot on this bill either.

    And guys, “clean” energy is a mirage. Wind power isn’t going to get it done, and solar, good luck with that too. Nuke power is ok, but Dems aren’t into it.

  • Cliff

    The QB drops back, he’s running for his life from the rushers, then all of a sudden, BOOM! 5 yard pass to the guy they weren’t even watching, 40 yards run after catch for a TD.
    .
    I hope that’s how it will play out.

  • Cliff

    And guys, “clean” energy is a mirage.
    .
    Prove it.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Cliff
    .
    spob is a troll. It just starts out sounding concilliatory until it draws you into a debate. Don’t fall for it.

  • sqr1

    More than anything else, it reminds me of watching a good screen play develop in the NFL. The QB drops back, he’s running for his life from the rushers, then all of a sudden, BOOM! 5 yard pass to the guy they weren’t even watching, 40 yards run after catch for a TD.
    .
    Actually, Obama reminds me of the Arizona Cardinals in the Super Bowl. Rather than going to their best weapon, Fitzgerald, for the first half of the game, Arizona threw a bunch of short passes that DIDN’T go for 40 yards.
    .
    Similarly, Obama inexplicably avoided using the bully pulpit to leverage his greatest asset — his own popularity — until now. The question is whether it is too late to salvage a stimulus package that will do more good than harm.

  • incandenzah

    Cliff, I think your simple “prove it” response to the spob troll is perfect. If they’re to be engaged at all (and I think it just gives them unnecessary attention), I think trolls (and those who simply spout pronouncements without evidentiary support on either side) should just get that 2-word challenge.

    Yes, spob: “Prove it.”

  • ctnewyankee

    We need to get the message out – this is a bill for us, the working people of America. When I talk to people about the bill, if they are not really engaged but right-leaning they spout off about the ‘pork’ and use examples like re-sodding the Mall or building ATV trails in parks. I always ask them who do they think is going to grow the sod, or build the trails or plant the grass? American farmers, American workers.
    My company laid off a further 25% of its diminished work force last week – what is the argument against extending unemployment, granting at least temporary health care coverage to all of the scared workers out there that know that they might be next, or the unfortunate ones that are already out of work? There are no jobs out there and it is going to get worse.
    Why on earth would the Senate compromise down the bill to eliminate aid to the states for education and to keep teachers and police and firemen employed? These are the bedrock wage earners of most communities? What are they thinking? We need to stop the hemorrhaging of job losses and work together to dig ourselves out of this mess.

    And guess what? My taxes are supporting the Congress. I, a blue-collar worker, employ the Senators and Representatives and now the bankers and investment honchos on Wall Street. All of these guys have a safety net – all of these people have health insurance – or pensions…
    But I have only my job for as long as I am lucky enough to have one. Out here in working class land we are scared and getting angrier everyday.
    Do not talk to me about tax cuts – I am up to here with listening to that talk – what we need is a job, any job will do and if it means building bridges or a new power grid or grooming trails in state parks I know plenty of people who are waiting to apply.

  • spob

    If wind is so great, why does it need subsidies?

    Let’s stimulate the economy by generating more expensive electricity–yeah, there’s an idea.

  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    Spob,
    -
    What you’re trying to say is this: “Despite the rapid pace of advance in so-called clean power sources, such as wind and solar, the technologies are not yet mature enough to provide all of our power needs without help from the government. Nuclear power can fully replace coal and other fossil fuel energy plants, but is not generally favored by Democrats or politicians in general due to NIMBY issues. Unpleasant as it is, we should admit our continued reliance on coal and other dirty power while continuing to encourage development of alternative sources until such time as they are capable of being fully and profitably exploited.”
    -
    Of course, even if you did make it sound all intelligent-y like that, you’d still be wrong as right now wind power comes in at about a half-cent/kilowatt hour cheaper than coal.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Nuke power is ok, but Dems aren’t into it.
    Would you care for a heaping helping of overgeneralization?
    .
    Part of the reasons the Republicans seem so lost is that they’re continuing to do battle with people who disappeared almost 35 years ago.
    .
    Yes, there was a time when objecting to nuclear power was fashionable but the ‘reality-based’ part of the equation has since come into play. We need to explore ALL energy options and we need to stop living in the past!

  • spob

    Wind is cheaper than coal. Ok, gotcha. And no, I don’t need your obnoxious rewrite. If wind power were so great, why has it been a disaster in Denmark? The Danes pay through the nose for their windpower.

    And let’s continue to develop our own natural resources–how many jobs in Utah were just sacrificed when the leases were nixed?

    I’d be fine with nuke power. Dems seem cool to the idea.

  • kristiia

    One of my favorite numbers from that Gallup poll:

    58% DISAPPROVAL of Republicans on the stimulus.

    58%!

    A huge majority DISAPPROVES of the bullsh*# the Republicans have been pulling for the last couple of weeks. While Republicans and the media are crowing about how awesome the Republicans have been in their obstruction, cherry-picking and, essentially, fiddling while Rome burns, the people are, to put it mildly, not impressed.

  • stuartzechman

    The Obama Administration needs to lock down its rhetoric with appeals to “common sense”.
    .
    It’s very, very encouraging to hear him do it personally.

  • spob
  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    A) windpower isn’t a disaster in Denmark. It’s more expensiver there than here because they have worse wind corridors than we do and generally have older, smaller, less efficient windmills than the newest models.
    -
    B) yes, you did need the rewrite since your original statement lacked facts, coherence, and reasoning
    -
    C) yes, wind is cheaper than coal. You think T.Boone Pickens is building his big farm in Oklahoma for fun? The guy likes money.
    -
    D) Utah has great wind climate. perhaps you should support wind power initiatives to help put some of those people back to work?

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    .
    spob, next time try to hide your link with html. There aint a chance in hell anybody is going to click on a redstate link you phucking idjut. What a maroon.

  • spob

    Ah, sgwhite, the guy who thinks that a white person deserved to get beaten up because of generalized grievances held by a bunch of thugs. Glad to see you in the debate.

    Well, Sean DeC, it’s not a disaster if you consider high electricity bills ok. Some people think otherwise: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/nyregion/09roosevelt.html?scp=1&sq=roosevelt&st=cse

    As for Utah and T. Boone, I’m cool with windpower. If people wanna build it, I don’t want to stand in their way, but as it stands now, it’s got to be subsidized, and it’s not a serious proposal for meeting the energy needs of the 21st Century. If it were, Denmark’s example would be followed everywhere–it ain’t. You’re right about T. Boone, he wants to make money, and if he makes money with subsidies, he’s making money.

    I have zero issues with a lot of commonsense means of energy efficiency. I’m cheap, so I use those flourescent light bulbs, and I keep the heat down in the house. But what’s going on here is not that. We are being asked to have more expensive power in a serious economic downturn. It’s f’in nuts. And Sean DeC, if you can’t get that from my earlier post, well, you aren’t as bright as you think you are.

  • Aaron

    We’re being asked to spend more money to create more jobs.
    .
    Somebody give me a Republican who understands macroeconomics, please.

  • incandenzah

    And with the call to “prove it!” comes the perennial RedState link. Bless you, sbob. All my previously held wingnut biases remain fully intact.

  • spob

    Aaron, I think the problem is that many Republicans understand macroeconomics too well. Government control of the economy sounds great etc. etc. Problem is that government-run anything is usually pretty bad.

    Guys, the CBO has some interesting things to say about the so-called stimulus. The CBO isn’t some nefarious GOP instrumentality.

  • spob

    incandenzah, i just said that the redstate link was interesting, I didn’t say it proved anything.

  • incandenzah

    spob… then the challenge remains: “Prove it.”

  • incandenzah

    Just for a start, spob, why not find a citation for what you think the CBO says about the current version of the bill….?

  • Cliff

    spob: you still haven’t proved your statement on renewable energy.

  • http://smoothlikeremy.blogspot.com/ sgwhiteinfla

    Heyyyyyyyyyy its our old troll just repackaged.
    .
    spob nobody believes you you need more people!!!!!!!!!!

  • incandenzah

    Right. Cliff’s first!

  • spob

    Prove what, that windpower isn’t a panacea? It sure doesn’t seem to be. The Danes pay high rates for electricity, the turbines kill a lot of birds and bats–it’s not like these are state secrets.

  • Cliff

    Aaron, I think the problem is that many Republicans understand macroeconomics too well.
    .
    Ha! Ha! Ha!

  • spob

    In contrast to its positive near-term macroeconomic effects, the Senate legislation would reduce output slightly in the long run, CBO estimates, as would other similar proposals. The principal channel for this effect is that the legislation would result in an increase in government debt. To the extent that people hold their wealth in the form of government bonds rather than in a form that can be used to finance private investment, the increased government debt would tend to “crowd out” private investment—thus reducing the stock of private capital and the long-term potential output of the economy.

    The negative effect of crowding out could be offset somewhat by a positive long-term effect on the economy of some provsions—such as funding for infrastructure spending, education programs, and investment incentives, which might increase economic output in the long run. CBO estimated that such provisions account for roughly one-quarter of the legislation’s budgetary cost. Including the effects of both crowding out of private investment (which would reduce output in the long run) and possibly productive government investment (which could increase output), CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net.

  • incandenzah

    spob. By “citation,” I also mean the link, so we can see what exactly the CBO refers to & what you might have left out (for length & whatnot). What is this from, anyway?

  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    spob,
    -
    you’re still ignoring the fact that windpower in America is cheaper by 1/2 cent per kilowatt/hour than coal. Yes, that only applies to newer wind turbines that have a larger sweep area and better conversion ratios. But it’s still true.
    -
    Denmark isn’t a great comparable for the U.S. because we have a significantly better wind climate for power generation than they do. A windmill will generate 8x as much power when you 2x the wind speed. Power generated from the wind increases as a cube of the wind speed increases. Quit making false/misleading analogies between things that aren’t more than superficially alike.

  • incandenzah

    Tit fer Tat, spob! I found this in the EmEssEm fer ya:
    .
    CBO: Stimulus Bill Could Meet Obama’s Job Creation Goal in Short Term
    .
    http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/stimulus/2009/02/05/cbo-stimulus-bill-could-meet-obamas-job-creation-goal-in-short-term.html

  • Cliff

    Here is the statement that I feel requires proof:
    .
    And guys, “clean” energy is a mirage.
    .
    Tell me why I have to continue to settle for coal and oil derived energy.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Another one who beleives in the fairy dust that makes government magically different from any other large organization. They’ve taken it on faith so long that their comepletely oblivious to
    .
    A: the really boneheaded moves that corporations make because their economic motivation is too shortsighted to adjust to rapidly changing conditions.
    .
    B: The fact that ONLY governemnts have the power necessary to encourage short term sacrifice for a longer term good.
    .
    Market forces have pushed us directly down an insustainable path to energy starvation. There’s nothing magical about it.

  • Aaron

    Macroecomics is not defined as “Government control of the economy sounds great.” Please, try again. (Once one does, one can see that government spending stimulates the market and creates jobs. Different types of spending are more efficient than others.)
    .
    According to the CBO report, the GDP would barely decrease but many jobs would be created/saved given the version of the stimulus package being analyzed within. Apparently, some wealthy Republicans would like to run employment up to 9% in an attempt to end up slightly richer than they would if jobs are created. (I suppose they are willing to do anything in the interest of promoting income inequality.)

  • lamh31

    Obama was really good at the townhall.

    This is the side of Obama that Repubs should be afraid of. If they are in a fight against Congressional Dems, then they can make this a partisan fight.

    They can’t win a fight against Obama himself. It’s what happened during the election. The oppo tried to marginalize him, but when people see him in person, they invariably like him.

    That’s what Repub and Stimulus obstructionist need to be afraid of. As President he is kinda on a learning curve. He wants to really be the Prez for all Americans, but as a politician, he is GOLDEN. He tried to be inclusive and the Repub who really had nothing to lose, bit the hand that fed them. So now they are getting the politician, and they need to watch out.

  • spob

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123336500319935517.html

    How’s that green jobs stuff working in California?

  • Cliff

    From the WSJ editorial:
    .
    “We’ve been sold a false bill of goods,” is how Republican Assemblyman Roger Niello, who has been the GOP’s point man on environmental issues in the legislature, put it to me.
    .
    What do the Democrats say about it? The editorial only quotes a Republican lawmaker.
    .
    Harvard’s Robert Stavins, chairman of the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s economic advisory committee under Bill Clinton, told me that “None of us knew who the other reviewers were, but we all came up with almost the same conclusion. The report was severely flawed and systematically underestimated costs.”
    .
    So they created policy based on a flawed report, and now it’s biting them in the ass. No surprise there, right?
    .
    We have to “be candid about the real costs of the transition,” a cautionary editorial advised. “Energy prices will rise, and major capital investment will be needed in public transit and new transmission lines. Industries that are energy intensive will move elsewhere.”
    .
    This sounds like a good argument for the kind of government interference you guys deplore. It also makes me think that maybe they tried to get this green jobs stuff done on the cheap, and it backfired.
    .
    <iThe green lobby has lectured us for years that global warming is all about the sanctity of science. Those who question the “scientific consensus” on catastrophic atmospheric changes are belittled as “deniers.” Now, in assessing the costs, the greens readily cook the books and throw good science out the window. “To most of the most strident supporters of this legislation,” says Mr. Niello, “the economic costs don’t really matter anyway, because we are supposedly facing an environmental apocalypse.”
    .
    Mmmmm, that’s some good global warming denial right there. In my eyes, that pretty much invalidates the column all by itself.

  • Cliff

    Aw crap, I screwed up the tags. That second to last paragraph should be italicized.

  • yutsano

    Got it Cliff.
    -
    Should I bother to bring up the Japan-is-the-only-place-that-can-build-the-steel-dome-big-enough argument or does that go right over Spob’s head too?

  • poh123

    WHat is wrong with the republicans…oh yes, they don’t know what has hit them yet. O BA MMMMMA! Yeah baby, that’s right. Oh how sweet it is.

  • Cliff

    Should I bother to bring up the Japan-is-the-only-place-that-can-build-the-steel-dome-big-enough argument or does that go right over Spob’s head too?
    .
    It’s a good argument, but a lot of people tend to get confused when more than one reason for something is put forth.

blog comments powered by Disqus