"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Saturday, February 7, 2009

CBO Stinks Up Democrats Pork Plan...and more


The Congressional Budget Office offered their take on the Democrat pork plan designed to infuse a trillion dollars into Democratic special interest projects and the opinion is less than favorable. The long term prognosis for this spending bill is not good according to the CBO.
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. 

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.
CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.
BO pledged to work across the aisle and bring anew to Washington a style of governing, but in his brief two weeks as President he has lost control of the governing process; Nancy Pelosi has taken over and is in charge. Bipartisanship is nothing more than a sparkling ideal for Obama and a sidebar distraction for her.
“Washington seems consumed in the process argument of bipartisanship, when the rest of the country says they need this bill,” the California Democrat said, seeming to sweep aside the Obama administration initial desire to have broad GOP support for the plan.
Whoa, Nancy Pelosi clearly shows she is out of touch with the public by making that statement. There is no overwhelming desire for this rotting piece of pork in its current form and most people want bipartisan support. The majority of people would like to see changes to this aggrandized plan, which is nothing more than Democrat's map to re-election, while the public is really concerned about the economy.
Eighty-one percent of Americans say the stimulus bill should be a bipartisan effort. Just 13 percent think it is okay for a bill to be passed with only the backing of the Democratic majority.
Here is a Democratic Congressman that has it right!

Walt Minnick, D-Idaho, and others have an alternate plan called The Strategic Targeted American Recovery and Transition Act (START Act) of 2009.
"The biggest difference is that I've cut out everything that doesn't create jobs in this year and next," Minnick said Thursday. "It's only $174 billion, $650 billion less than what the House passed and probably $750 billion less than the trillion dollar bill the Senate is talking about. It focuses on infrastructure spending, there's $70 billion on bridges, roads and school construction and there's $100 billion on tax cuts to middle and low income people.
Minnick said his proposal would spend all the money by the end of 2010, while the White House proposal would only spend 30 percent of the larger amount they're proposing.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

We're getting what we deserve. We voted for this guy, a contrived candidate that was served up by an adoring media and public that worships fashion and MTV, not to mention educationed by our public schools. The Pelosi mindset is everywhere. Free stuff is on the way.

The good thing is here in NY we stand to get a bucch of free money due to the stimulus package. So we haven't had to change a thing. No spending cuts, all special interestes remain fat and happy, yet they've bought a little more time for the party. And someone else paid. If we can just do the same thing next year,,,and the year after that,, and the year after that. The kids sure are gonna be happy when they figure this one out. But then again, they're public school grads too, so maybe they won't.

Dan Francis said...

The trouble with guys like Rep. Walt Minnick (D-ID) (a Blue Dog DEM who won big in his ID race that has 20% more GOPers than DEMS) is that his own party in general, or as a whole, brush him off along with his moderate (and common sense) ideas (i.e., Speaker Pelosi, I'm sure hates his guts - a bit strong, perhaps, but probably true).

Guys like Walt are needed to offer balance and sanity in an otherwise insane set of circumstances.

Most DEMS just don’t get it. They are there in the majority to get things done; not muck things up!

The Senate bill now cut by over $1 billion moves back to the House to reconcile the differences ... and I predict that Speaker Pelosi will fight it tooth and nail.

If I were in the House, I'd move to get a new Speaker because she needs to be replaced.
She is part of the problem - not part of the solution.

So, when faced with a problem; get rid of the problem source and solve the damn problem.

That's leading by example: Either lead or get out of the way.

Speaker Pelosi is in the way.

Dan Francis said...

F/U to my rant about Speaker Pelosi is based on this:

* In a statement sure to rile Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Friday dismissed calls for bipartisanship as “process” arguments extraneous to passing a stimulus bill — and warned Senate Democrats against slashing proposed increases to education spending.

* Pelosi — speaking to reporters on the second day of her retreat with House Democrats at a swank Williamsburg, Va., golf resort — was clearly annoyed with Senate attempts to slash up to $100 billion in spending from the $819 billion package the House passed last week.

* At the same time, she urged the need for speed in passing the package — and stopped short of saying that she’d insist on her demands during upcoming conference negotiations with the Senate.

I note: "... her demands?" - how about the country's needs vs. no waste, no accountability or no wants?

My point.

political tp said...

well, one good thing....dan francis isn't in congress.

Anonymous said...

I don't see it that way at all. Dan Francis in congress wouldn't be a bad thing. What, specifically, do you disagree with? Or do you just want to ride by and throw bs? It is safe that way, as you don't have to back anything up.

Anonymous said...

I need help with a question regarding this bail-out. When can I stop paying my mortgage? Also, when would be the best time to run up a huge credit card bill so that I can back-out and stiff the card company?

I want to make sure that I preserve my place in line for the handouts.

Obama in 2012!

Anonymous said...

It's really is a damn shame. Just like Pavlov's dogs the Repuke Senators went straight after items regarding alternative energy, energy efficiency, environment restoration and here's the kicker.
The Rebubs slashed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (weather), Environmental Protection Agency(enforcement), Coast Guard polar icebreaker/cutters(field studies) and the National Science Foundation(environmental remediation). If I was Exxobile and wanted to hide or delay countering efforts to stop Global Warming this would have been my game plan. Mere coincidence, doubtful?

The Repubs say "but it's all about jobs", what utter bull shit is that. Meanwhile the big corporation media disinformation outlets broadcasting all Repuk's all the time. American's are acting like morons.

Looks like in 2010 & 2012, all Repuke re-election money will be coming from BIG OIL and the energy lobby.

Wake up everybody, put aside your blinders and watch what they do, and for whom, and not what they. say.

Dan Francis said...

Anon 7:09: You are right on and sound exactly like so many in the GOP who have been blinded and dupped by "tax cuts" solve everything issue (and little else).

I wonder why there were no tax cuts during the Great Depression or during WWII?

Now, to be fair to you, Geo. W. Bush did hand out some pretty nice tax cuts during two wars and look at where that, in part, got us today?

But, hey, we have all that Iraqi oil to thank for helping us out by paying for that war ($10-$12 billion a month for over 6 years), right?

Keep this in mind: the GOP had control from 1995-2006 and 2001-2008...

~ So, scurry on

The Frontline Coalition said...

The government took over our economy during WW2 to make weapons. So next time we have to do that then I'll agree we don't need tax cuts. However, now we need to grow our economy, spur investment and create jobs-and the best way to do that is cut taxes to provide people with more disposable income and allow small businesses to reinvest in their companies. Truth.

If you want to throw some money at some spending programs in the next 6 months to awaken the animal spirits or whatever, fine. But don't try to convince anyone except fellow indentured government servants that the government can spend our money better than themselves.

That's why we need to start electing actual fiscal conservatives in Congress. Now that Kirsten Gillibrand is in the Senate, Republicans down there have an opportunity to sneak in one with a proven track record.

Let's hope they can pull it off.

-JBurke

Anonymous said...

Dan, I don't agree that the tax cuts are what got us in trouble. It was the spending that just kept going and going. We can argue about the war, welfare, energy, healthcare, anything you want to argue about. But tax cuts did not cause this. I realize it is popular to think that way, and media will not question it, but the problem was, and is, spending.
We can't spend what we don't have.
Why is that so complicated for folks to understand?

I think the answer, partially, would be to spend another trillion, today, that we have to borrow. Just kidding.

Hahahahahaha ha

I like that ha thing. It has gotten particularly funny, lately.

Anonymous said...

8:03 I've read and re-read your post, and I can't understand what you are saying. Other than your love of the word, puke, I see nothing of substance.

The problem with the STIMULUS bill is it does not stimulate anything. Icebreakers are neat things, but have nothing to do with immediate job creation. That's what your man claims this bill is about, immediate job creation.

I don't see where it is. Looks like a SanFrancisco treat with borrowed money to me. Not that I would know what a SanFrancisco treat actually is.

Anonymous said...

that polar ice breaker is around 300 million I thought they were worried about the ice melting.what in hell they want to break it for? let it melt,so we loose NYC so what!

Live Blogging