All Posts Tagged With: "Congress"

If Republicans can’t have a perfect bill to stimulate the economy,
they’d rather have no economy at all.

(Note: Video may take a moment to load)

In the interest of full disclosure, here is Congressman Phil Gingrey’s public statement regarding the Politico article, which I posted about this morning, that quoted the congressman making remarks seemingly critical of Rush Limbaugh:

Because of the high volume of phone calls and correspondence received by my office since the Politico article ran, I wanted to take a moment to speak directly to grassroots conservatives.  Let me assure you, I am one of you.  I believe I was sent to Washington to fight for and defend our traditional values of smaller government, lower taxes, a strong national defense, and the lives of the unborn.  In my six years in Washington, I have led the charge on many of these issues.  In fact, in 2008 The National Journal ranked me the #1 most conservative Member of the House of Representatives.

As long as I am in the Congress, I will continue to fight for and defend our sacred values.  I have actively opposed every bailout, every rebate check, every so called “stimulus.”  And on so many of these things, I see eye-to-eye with Rush Limbaugh.  Regardless of what yesterday’s headline may have read, I never told Rush to back off. I regret and apologize for the fact that my comments have offended and upset my fellow conservatives—that was not my intent.  I am also sorry to see that my comments in defense of our Republican Leadership read much harsher than they actually were intended, but I recognize it is my responsibility to clarify my own comments.

Now more than ever, we need to articulate a clear conservative message that distinguishes our values and our approach from those of liberal Democrats who are seeking to move our nation in the wrong direction. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, and other conservative giants are the voices of the conservative movement’s conscience.  Everyday, millions and millions of Americans—myself included—turn on their radios and televisions to listen to what they have to say, and we are inspired by their words and by their determination.  At the end of the day, every member of the conservative movement, from our political commentators and thinkers to our elected officials, share an important and common purpose in advancing the cause of liberty, reigning in a bloated federal government, and defending our traditional family values.

Fair enough, although I wonder where this “conservative” was for his last six years in Congress in “reigning in a bloated federal government” under a Republican administration and Republican Congress for four of those six years.

*
* My thanks to Red Stater for holding me to a higher standard.

“This was not a drive-by P.R. stunt, and I actually thought it might be. It was a substantive, in-depth discussion with our conference, and he’s very effective. He knows that the debt and the deficit are huge long-term problems as well and he made a compelling case. He sounded, frankly, a lot like a Republican.”

—  Representative Zach Wamp, Republican of Tennessee

*
[Hat tip: Sullivan]

President Bush, along with a sloppy and incontinent Republican majority in Congress, managed the feat of discrediting free market economics without ever practicing it. It was the Republicans who passed the Medicare prescription drug bill, and the bloated farm bill, and the transportation pork. This disqualifies most Republicans from challenging the gigantic new trough feeding that is about to begin under the Democrats.

— Mona Charen, nationally syndicated neoconservative
columnist, political analyst and author

In a comment about my earlier post about the family planning money likely being dropped from Obama’s stimulus plan, Daniel said he opposed family planning provisions in the House Dems’ stimulus proposal because he opposes pork in the stimulus bill. On that point, I would agree. I don’t know that I necessarily agree that this family planning money fits the classical definition of pork since it is available to any state that wants to participate and that it has the potential to save the government hundreds of millions of dollars. Having said that, I have no loyalty or passion for this provision, so I really don’t care whether it stays or goes. I would prefer to spend stimulus money on infrastructure, public investment and aid to the ailing states.

What I take issue with in Daniel’s comment is this statement and accompanying un-sourced quote:

Most of the money that will be spent won’t even be spent until after the ‘10 elections.

The government wouldn’t be able to spend at least one-fourth of a proposed $825 billion economic stimulus plan until after 2010, according to a preliminary report by the Congressional Business Office that suggests it may take longer than expected to boost the economy. The government would spend about $26 billion of the money this year and $110 billion more next year, the report said. About $103 billion would be spent in 2011, while $53 billion would be spent in 2012 and $63 billion between 2013 and 2019.

The problem with his statement is that it’s simply not true. Whatever his source, it cites a “preliminary report” that really wasn’t any official CBO report at all, as ThinkProgress noted yesterday:

As the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim and the American Prospect’s Tim Fernholz reported last Friday, the CBO report being touted by conservatives and the media isn’t an actual report. “We did not issue any report, any analysis or any study,” a CBO aide told the Huffington Post.

Instead, the CBO “ran a small portion of an earlier version of the stimulus plan through a computer program that uses a standard formula” to determine how quickly money will be spent. As Center for American Progress Senior Fellow Scott Lily notes, even that CBO analysis is based “almost entirely on a review of historical data on program performance,” which likely applies “less during an economic crisis like the one we currently face.” OMB Director Peter Orszag says that 75 percent of the stimulus plan “will be spent over the next year and a half.”

Today, The Washington Post reports what the official CBO report actually says:

Approximately two-thirds of the spending and tax cuts contained in an economic stimulus package crafted by House Democrats would flow into the economy by the end of fiscal 2010, producing a “noticeable impact on economic growth and employment,” congressional budget analysts said yesterday.

In an eagerly awaited analysis of the stimulus package, which is set for a vote in the House tomorrow, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that the measure would cost the federal government about $816 billion over the next 10 years and that approximately $526 billion, or about 65 percent, would be spent by the end of September 2010.

The reality is, according to the CBO report, most of the money would be spent before the 2010 elections.

Now, what is true is that some portions of the stimulus package will be spent at a slower rate than other portions. For example, the CBO estimates that only 40 percent of the package devoted to highways, schools and other infrastructure projects would be spent by the end of 2010. Other portions that include tax cuts and direct aid to the poor and unemployed would be spent at a faster rate. But we shouldn’t reject infrastructure projects simply because they take longer to ramp up. This nation is in desperate need of infrastructure improvement — especially with its bridges. This portion of the stimulus will continue to inject investment into the economy beyond 2010, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

The point is, if you’re going to challenge the merits of something, you should probably understand that thing enough to know what its merits may or may not be.

Who says (with any intellectual honesty) that Obama’s not reaching across the aisle and listening to Republicans? From TPM:

House Democrats are likely to jettison family planning funds for the low-income from an $825 billion economic stimulus bill, officials said late Monday, following a personal appeal from President Barack Obama at a time the administration is courting Republican critics of the legislation.

Several officials said a final decision was expected on Tuesday, coinciding with Obama’s scheduled visit to the Capitol for separate meetings with House and Senate Republicans.

The provision has emerged as a point of contention among Republicans, who criticize it as an example of wasteful spending that would neither create jobs nor otherwise improve the economy.

Under the provision, states no longer would be required to obtain federal permission to offer family planning services — including contraceptives — under Medicaid, the health program for the low-income.

That’s one less thing the GOP can use as an excuse not to work with the president on this stimulus plan. So far it has been the president who has done the most compromising, at the detriment of his own party, to try to achieve compromise and agreement. I don’t see the same effort on the part of the GOP to come to a consensus. Are the Republicans going to be part of the solution or just an obstacle to any solution?

(Note: Video may take a moment to load)

Obama to GOP: ‘I won’

President Obama listened to Republican gripes about his stimulus package during a meeting with congressional leaders Friday morning - but he also left no doubt about who’s in charge of these negotiations. “I won,” Obama noted matter-of-factly, according to sources familiar with the conversation.

Hugh Hewitt makes some great points worth considering:

In that question is the new president’s greatest political danger. He’s about to oversee the spending of an unthinkable $1 trillion in taxpayer dollars ($350 billion in the second half of the bank bailout, and at least $700 million in the stimulus package.)  Even if growth returns as expected in the second half of 2009, voters in 2010 and beyond will be wondering, and Republicans will be asking: “Where did it go?  What did it buy?  What do we have to show for it?”

If President Obama oversees the payout of more than a trillion bucks and cannot point to anything but statistics to show for it in two years, he’ll have a political nightmare on his hands, and he’ll deserve it.  The enormous size of the stimulus is a never-before-seen-in-American-history splurge, and the Democrats thus far show no sign of treating it as other than a vast payout to their friends.

If President Obama was to demand the funding for and enabling legislation to kick start the construction of the dozens of new nuclear power plants this country needs, as well as the wind turbines envisioned by T. Boone Pickens and the grid expansion everyone knows is necessary, not only would he be creating thousands and thousands of great jobs, he’d be powering the U.S. up for a second American century.

I agree, except that it won’t just be Republicans asking “”Where did it go?  What did it buy?  What do we have to show for it?” Every taxpayer who’s paying attention will all be asking those same questions, regardless of their political identification.

If we’re going to infuse trillions of taxpayers’ dollars into the economy by way of astronomical deficits, then it better be for worthwhile investments into long-lasting projects that not only infuse capital into our economy but also addresses some of our nation’s long-term fundamental needs — like infrastructure and energy. As Hewitt noted, the nation’s power grid needs some serious work, including beefing up its security. Roads and bridges across the country, including right here in Oklahoma, are in desperate need of repair, rebuilding and new construction to replace the aging, outdated and obsolete structures designed for an era long past with much less traffic loads. And the nation certainly needs massive investment in innovation and infrastructure building for alternative energy sources, whether for our cars or for our commercial and private energy needs.

This can’t be a political pork feast with the most senior members of Congress getting the best chunks for their districts at the disadvantage of the country as a whole. The party in power needs to exercise its power with prudence and not with greed. I know that’s a lot to ask, but let’s just try it once since our nation literally sits at a precarious precipice. This not the time for politics and grandstanding but for meaningful and effective bipartisan solutions.

I’ve got a suggestion of my own. If in two years there is nothing to show for all this massive spending, we fire all of them — all 535 members of Congress — with a four-year ban before they can run for that office again. So, if they can’t set aside their political posturing and grandstanding and come together to diligently and honestly work on solutions for this country, then they are terminated for failure to perform. The stakes are too high for business as usual on Capitol Hill.

In two years (and again in four years), I will ask this Congress and this new president, “what do we have to show for it?” There better be some good answers. We certainly haven’t had must to show from the last big stimulus package nor from the economic policies of the last eight years. It’s certainly time for serious change and it’s most definitely time for complete accountability.

This blog post is dedicated to David McAfee and his fellow crusaders:

ABC News’ Dean Norland reports: Members of the Senate marched to the other side of the Capitol just before 1 p.m. to meet in a joint session in the House chamber with their House colleagues to witness the quadrennial counting of the electoral votes. …

Vice President Dick Cheney, acting in his capacity as president of the Senate, presided as clerks opened the sealed certificates.

Cheney then handed them state by state in alphabetical order to one of four tellers, two members of the House and two members of the Senate, who announced the results.

After the declaration and counting was over, Cheney proclaimed to the cheering chamber what the world has known since Nov. 4, that Barack Obama and Joseph Biden had been elected the next president and vice president of the United States.