Voting along party lines, the House and Senate approved budget blueprints that would trim Obama’s spending proposals for the fiscal year that begins in October and curtail his plans to cut taxes. The blueprints, however, would permit work to begin on the central goals of Obama’s presidency: an expansion of health-care coverage for the uninsured, more money for college loans and a cap-and-trade system to reduce gases that contribute to global warming. [Emphasis added]
Obama and the Democrats’ budget promotes an ambitious agenda. It will make some fundamental changes that will touch every American. It also puts the Democrats in a place they haven’t been in decades: The Democratic party will now be held completely responsible for the success or failure of their agenda. Since the Democrats hold both the presidency and both houses of Congress, they must take full responsibility for the impact of their plans, and they need to ensure the plans are successful.
I have confidence that the Democrats’ plan will be good for the American people. It makes significant investments up front to reduce the cost of living for Americans. If successful, it will bring down health-care costs, make education more affordable, and jumpstart the creation of green jobs.
But it will take time for the full impact of the plan to be felt. In the next year or two, the costs will be felt but the benefits will most likely not. The result is that, in 2010, the Democrats will likely be somewhat unpopular. Democrats need to stick to their guns, and not throw away their agenda. It will take several years for Americans to start seeing the savings the Obama plan would create, and during that time it will be quite tempting to scale it back to avoid political backlash. But Democrats should focus on making their plan successful over the long run, instead of getting distracted by the daily message war.
“The Democratic party will now be held completely responsible for the success or failure of their agenda.”
Is this a misprint?
So is this budget to finish out 2009 FY or the 2009-2010 FY?
-D
“The Republican party will now be held completely responsible for the 8 years of mismanagement that is the foundation of the financial crisis and then refusing to do anything to solve the problems they caused.”
There fixed that for you Cman.
I hope you are right, Jeff. And I for one hope the Democrats’ desire to improve all Americans’ quality of life succeeds.
What about the other side of the ledger, though? The costs? I see the Dems trumpeting what every one gets. But what do we need to sacrifice? Let’s have that discussion openly.
It would be like me coming home one day and announcing to my family “I’m happy to report, wife and kids, that we now have a 2010 top-of-the-line Lexus SUV. It has all the high comforts - leather, DVD player, etc. It is very safe, and will help keep our family safe. And it has the best navigation system out there, so we don’t have to worry about getting lost or stranded. This is a huge step for our family!”
…….the fine print… we also got a monthly car payment of $720…… and there is no way we can afford it.
But the benefits!!!
Leave it to a parasite on society like DtM, to compare basic health care to a Lexus SUV. It becomes more and more apparent how disconnected the GOP is with society and the problems that 98% of us face every day. Then DtM comes up with some pablum about DVD players and navigational systems, wanting, I assume to make some incomprehensible point. Amazing. You want to talk about who’s going to sacrifice what? How’s this, 2% of society is going to contribute taxes to the same level of wealth they own. In other words, the top 2% owns 98% of the wealth in the nation, they will pay 98% of the tax bill.
Oh Richard, you make me chuckle. Haven’t heard from you in a while.
A day without Richard is like a day without darkness.
Your example is fine DtM. Richard chooses not to address the true point of your example just like a politician. The old duck and weave and turn the blame back on someone else.
The Democratic party will now be held completely responsible for the success or failure of their agenda.
Yeah, and the reality of it is that the democratic executive branch is trying to fix a mess that should have been fixed long ago.
Think: Like a tonka toy truck trying to get to the top of Mt. Everest.
But I hope we make it.
DtM’s analogy would work if his $750/month SUV would bring the average cost of cars to a reasonable level for EVERY American. Then it makes a unconventionally budgeted car purchase somewhat more reasonable.
As an aside, I could afford (as I suspect DtM could) a $750/month car payment if I eliminated my payment on my ten year old rattletrap. Not that I would do that.
That car example is frivolous and frankly stupid. We are not talking about a luxury when unemployment is at a 25 year high and there is no end in sight. This isn’t an issue of middle-class ego gratification, this is a crisis. Recently the radio interviewed a high level cop on whether this crisis had increased crime. His answer implied a “not yet too much,” “mind if I whistle past this graveyard” and “lets not talk about this summer.” I suggest that you make sure to lockdown that Lexus SUV and never park it in a less than great neighborhood while locking all doors in case of a carjack. You afraid of a class war, to paraphrase Victor Hugo, “The law in its’ infinite wisdom forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping under bridges and stealing food.” At the point that unemployed people are stealing bread you will not want to be the only bakery in town.
A comparable situation from real life would be the young couple with a kid facing eviction with no food in the house calling up the parents and saying “We need some help.” Now whether it is the fault of the couple can be figured out later, the rent needs to be paid now. The ideologically driven Republican parents are all for doing nothing and let God sort it out. After all the parents are not hurting to a great degree. The pragmatic Democratic parents are for finding a way to get the money now even with make work projects and start the road to recovery.
Nobody is happy with the domestic economy right now. Democrats can think of a bunch of important stuff that needs work other than what we are now going to be doing. The issue is that after 8 years of Republican smoke being blown up our skirts about the economy there is real trouble in America. It needs to be worked on immediately. Republicans continue to blow smoke while pretending there is no crisis in the economy. I suggest they ask any car dealer, restaurant owner or salesperson how things are going. They will get an earful.
The real joke is that Republicans still think a tax cut for the wealthy is the answer. The solution is not by cutting taxes for people making more than $250,000 a year. Bluntly, if you are making that kind of income, you can hire the accountants and tax lawyers to make sure you don’t get hurt that much. Plus since there is no assurances that this tax cut money would actually be used for American jobs versus investing the liquid assets overseas, it doesn’t matter anyway. The last 8 years of these type of tax cuts resulted in fewer jobs in America and lower wages.
Since Rush is the seeming head of that party they simply do not have a new idea or a clue as to solve the problems they created and Americans are ignoring them in droves. Check out recent polls and see the negatives citizens have for Republicans. I think our Lexus SUV example is exactly why most Americans view Republicans as out of touch and clueless.
We are about to spend the most money in one stretch that our nation has ever spent, and will go into grave debt in order to do it. We are promising, spending, giving, with very little mention of how it gets paid for and by whom.
I think my example of someone going out and buying a car well above their family’s means, with little thought about what it will do to the family’s finances, is quite accurate.
DtM — As I said before, I think it is too. The problem with the Obama supporters is, they want/have to support him, but they don’t want to think about the argument you make about spending. They just hope, somehow, someway, IT WORKS!
One thing I do know. I’m not smart enough, nor is anybody here, to wrap our heads about how much is being spent and how much effect this debt will have in the future. If it works, I’ll admit it. If it doesn’t we may have big troubles ahead.
Cman -
Perhaps we finally figured out what Obama means by “hope”. We need to “hope” the the laws of mathematics change somehow, and that these expenditures can actually be paid for by our current and future society.
Actually, I think the plan is to keep the evil Bush tax cuts, except for the very top earners. Apparently tax cuts are actually O.K. after all. Raising the tax at the top may make a lot of people feel better, but it in no way comes near to paying for the deficit/national debt. I think that there may be a tiny number of Republicans that do realize that the economy is bad, they just don’t think that propping up GM is going to fix it. I’m not sure that the 900 miliion to rebuild Gaza is going to help our economy either but I’ll defer to Mr. Krugman on economic matters at this point.
Bitch, bitch, bitch…
YOu make alot of noise about this, but what’s your equivalent alternative solution, neocons?
Oh, that’s right, TAX CUTS. Let’s continue down the deathmarch trail we’ve been slogging on for 8 years.
If your boat springs more and more leaks, the solution is to shoot more holes in it? As Curly learned, it won’t drain the water out.
DtM:
Obama recently gave a much better analogy than yours to justify the high level of deficit spending in his budget proposal. As my summary would be much less eloquant than Obama’s, I found his exact words from his April 1st press conference with G. Brown:
“…..And so I would ask people to be confident about their own futures. And that may mean, in some cases, spending now as investments for the future. There’s been a debate back home about our budget: In the midst of this crisis, should we deal with health care? Should we deal with energy? Should we deal with education? And one of the analogies I’ve used is a family who is having a difficult time — and I actually get letters like this occasionally from voters — one of our parents has lost their job, savings have declined, and so I’m wrestling with whether or not I should go to college because that will require me taking out a lot of debt, and maybe it would be more responsible for me to go find any job that I can to help the family.
And, you know, when I write back to those families or those individuals I say, well, you’ve obviously got to make these decisions yourself, but don’t shortchange the future because of fear in the present. That I think is the most important message that we can send not just in the United States but around the world……”
(transcritpts of all all speeches, press conferences, statements, etc can be found here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Joint-Press-Availability-With-President-Barack-Obama-and-Prime-Minister-Gordon-Brown)(
As a just-getting-by underemployed ($12 /hr. temp job) parent of a high school student, I think Obama has it exactly right. I’d also say, in addition to putting people back to work, providing basic health care to people and trying to head of global environmental catastrophy is $ well spent in Obama’s budget.
As long as I am in cut and paste mode, the $2 trillion banking bailout is what Obama should be getting criticism for
(from Bill Moyers show -http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/transcript1.html)
BILL MOYERS: Yeah. Are you saying that Timothy Geithner, the Secretary of the Treasury, and others in the administration, with the banks, are engaged in a cover up to keep us from knowing what went wrong?
WILLIAM K. BLACK: Absolutely.
BILL MOYERS: You are.
WILLIAM K. BLACK: Absolutely, because they are scared to death. All right? They’re scared to death of a collapse. They’re afraid that if they admit the truth, that many of the large banks are insolvent. They think Americans are a bunch of cowards, and that we’ll run screaming to the exits. And we won’t rely on deposit insurance. And, by the way, you can rely on deposit insurance. And it’s foolishness. All right? Now, it may be worse than that. You can impute more cynical motives. But I think they are sincerely just panicked about, “We just can’t let the big banks fail.” That’s wrong.
BILL MOYERS: But what might happen, at this point, if in fact they keep from us the true health of the banks?
WILLIAM K. BLACK: Well, then the banks will, as they did in Japan, either stay enormously weak, or Treasury will be forced to increasingly absurd giveaways of taxpayer money. We’ve seen how horrific AIG — and remember, they kept secrets from everyone.
The show is well worth a watch or read.
It is hard to disagree with the analogy of a family grappling with if they should send their kid to college. I would give the same advice — don’t shortchange your future.
So using my Lexus analogy, and Obama’s college analogy, perhaps the real question is this:
How do we ensure our elected officials have the wisdom to separate the Lexus from the college tuition? These bills have alot of each in them. Let’s strip away the $700 a month Lexus. Let’s not skimp on the college tuition.
The point others might be making is that few are driving the Lexus, or asking for a Lexus. When the majority hurts, it’s out of touch to talk about a Lexus.
I think we’ll have to make cuts, yes, and sadly they will be unpopular because (once again, and more so) people will hurt. But what do we cut? It’s easy to drive the Lexus and suggest cuts, DtheM. Is that why you suggest a “Lexus” analogy? You looked out the window?
And so, on to: How do we fix this mess?
How do we use bailout money wisely?
I think we need to regulate to protect the middle class’ ability to prosper, and make sure there are checks and balances. I’m thinking we’re not hearing enough about checks and balances.
It’s scary when the govnt steps in and asks for a CEO to resign and then suggests a plan for what would fix GM.
As Obama (and others) send out these “suggestions”, there should be talk of how the govn’t doesn’t want to be involved in making these decisions, but is doing so to help save jobs.
It would be nice to hear things like: and here’s the end, or extent, of our goven’t involvement. Once this is done and this is done, we’re at this point and this will happen.
Meanwhile, what jobs are being created back here? When does that happen?
“When the majority hurts, it’s out of touch to talk about a Lexus.”
You guys have completely missed my point on the Lexus. Let’s change the example to a Ford Focus, OK? And then let’s assume that the payment is $300, ok? And my point is that there is still not room in the budget for that Ford Focus. It is going to get repo’d in 2 years, and the family’s credit will be shot, and it is all because they spent stupidly, only thinking about the features of the focus and not thinking about if they were in a position to buy one.
And to take it a step further, buying that Ford Focus today may actually prevent them from helping pay for their kid’s college in 3 years. He or she will have to go into mega-debt to get a BA degree. How sad. All because they felt they could spend their way out of a problem, buying the Focus.
That is my point.
Although I will maintain, the rate we’re spending money right now on questionable projects resembles a decked-out Lexus much more than a Focus.
“but what about healthcare? you call healthcare questionable”? Someone always seems to use the healthcare card. There are billions and billions and billions of dollars in these bills that are of questionable value and on which it is nearly impossible to find a Return on Investment that will benefit the greater good.
DantheMan,
“There are billions and billions and billions of dollars in these bills that are of questionable value and on which it is nearly impossible to find a Return on Investment that will benefit the greater good.”
Such as?
There’s nothing wrong with investing in the future. A sound investment takes into consideration the ramifications to more than one scenario in the future. In this case can we pay for the debt if things don’t go well, or are we only looking at a scenario of a strong and growing economy. I do fear that in a deep recession that tackling numerous huge projects can bankrupt us if we don’t consider degrees of success. Hopefully congress can look at reality (not holding my breath) and not bite off more than we can chew. If I have a college student that ends up with a $60,000 loan at the end of 4 years, could he/she have been able to get a similar education and end up with a $30,000 loan? Families are certainly asking themselves those questions under the current circumstances. Why shouldn’t the government have to use the same restraints other than it’s taxpayer money?
C”Rush”,
Suddenly the dittoheads are the champions of fiscal responsibility.
That started in late 2008 for some reason.
You have no credibility, C”Rush”, and seem to offer only the deathbed lectures of a ideology on life support, and that is why your points ring hollow. You were an enabler of stupidity, and now, why should anyone still take a dittohead seriously?
At least with the Obama administration, the money is not being moved either out of the country or straight into the pockets of the wealthiest among us. That “investment” has yet to show any pay off.
C”Rush”,
“A sound investment takes into consideration the ramifications to more than one scenario in the future.”
Where was this voice the past 8 years, before all the bubbles that burst?
“benefit the greater good”
DtM — Holly is most assuredly looking for solutions to “benefit the greater good”. Is it possible she has a different agenda than the administration?
C”Rush”
” Is it possible she has a different agenda than the administration?”
Could you explain your typical right wing comment further? You are saying the Obama administration is not interested in the common good, but you do not explain why, dittohead.