Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Obama Presses for Economic Stimulus Package - Meets with Bipartisan Hill Leaders

January 23, 2009 1:12 PM

ABC News' Sunlen Miller Reports:

Speaking at the start of a bipartisan meeting in the Roosevelt Room, President Obama thanked the Democratic and Republican Congressional leaders for “moving forward very diligently” on the process of getting a recovery and renewal plan passed.

Obama himself admitted that there are still differences in opinion on the details of the plan on the Hill but said they are all unified by the reality of the dire economic situation they all have to deal with.

“I know that it is a heavily lift to do something as substantial as we're doing right now," said Obama. "I recognize that there are still some differences around the table and between the administration and the members of Congress about particular details on the plan. But what I think unifies this group is recognition that we are experiencing an unprecedented, perhaps, economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly.”   

Following the meeting, House Minority Leader John Boehner expressed some concern about the size and spending of the $825 billion dollar economic stimulus package.

“How you can spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives -- how does that stimulate the economy,” Boehner questioned to reporters, “You can go through a whole host of issues in this bill that have nothing to do with growing jobs in America.” 

Boehner was referencing a provision in the bill that Energy and Commerce marked up on Wednesday- that would now allow 50 states to offer Medicaid family planning service (like contraceptives) with the federal government’s $9-$1 match.  Republicans say that whether or not this is good public policy it has nothing to do with an economic stimulus.

Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that the bipartition meeting today was productive and moving towards the goal post to be on the president’s desk before President’s Day recess.

“The administration strikes me as open to our suggestions, and we made a number of them, both Senate and House leadership,” McConnell said, “I do think we'll be able to meet the president's deadline of getting the package to him by mid-February."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid indicated that the was significant discussion within today’s meeting about the CBO numbers --- which concluded that only $26 billion out of $358 billion in infrastructure and other appropriated spending would be delivered into the economy by the end of the budget year.

Reid said that OMB director Peter Orszag explained to the group today that the CBO study only analyzed 40% of the bill.

“He said he would guarantee that at least 75 percent of the bill would go directly into the economy within the first 18 months,” Reid said of Orszag's prognosis.

Leader Reid said he is not worried about Republicans blocking the plan and seconded the confidence expressed that the bill would be ready for the President’s signature by mid-February – a sentiment that the President backed up during the meeting as well.

--Sunlen Miller

January 23, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (19)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

vote against the stimulus package until it comes down to only aiding the citizens of the United States with their homes going into foreclosure and immediate jobs that is not hiring into the govt subsidy programs.
The bill can be cut in about half or send every home owner about $15000.00 and watch the economy. We don't need tax dollars aiding the veterans of WWII in the Phil. Islands. another waste of money by our leaders.

Posted by: edward bruno | Feb 5, 2009 8:56:01 PM

Obama transition team plans to delay the February 17th digital TV conversion is a bombshell to most of the industry who have invested hundreds of millions of dollars and years preparing and re-aligning their businesses. This is a top 10 list of why there should not be a delay in the digital convergence for television. I don’t want to be cynical, but I suspect that the big boys in the cable and satellite industries are using monopoly politics as usual. They all use the delay tactic to limit the competition. So here you go…

1. It will kill a huge economic stimulus, that’s already in process. Companies throughout the television industry are creating new ways of addressing this emerging opportunity. Broadcasters, programmers and hundreds of support business have been formed or expanded around this new format and new companies are emerging (jobs).

2. Delaying digital conversion isn't "Green"! And I don't mean just money. Analog transmitters use three to four times the energy to operate as digital transmitters. What are we burning to get this energy?

3. It will stop the TV public from getting the highest quality TV reception with more channels! Why stop viewers with broadcast reception from enjoying the same high quality as those who have cable or satellite? Viewers with broadcast reception on digital TV will get a much better program selection and viewing experience. As word of this proliferates the reluctant converts will rush to get converters. A delay won't create demand, just kill it!

4. Digital Television is the same low cost to the viewer as over-air broadcast. Those on cable or satellite looking for alternatives to save money in these difficult economic times should be given the digital reception option now!

5. Running dual analog and digital systems beyond the February 17 conversion date costs money, it doesn't save money! Operating costs of both analog and digital systems require two payments for electric utilities. Broadcasters should not be required to continue to support this dual delivery system at a huge cost to them, which eventually will be passed to us the viewers as well as businesses who advertise on these broadcast outlets.

6. Huge investments in place to convert to digital (mandated by the government) won't show the projected return and may lead to less competition. As stations struggle with increased carrying cost of capital some may fail. (Loss of jobs)

7. It will prevent consumers from getting the benefit of their new digital television purchases. Some have purchased digital TV’s with the intent to save money by opting out of paid services for entertainment and news. Now that these viewers have purchased these televisions don’t pull the plug!

8. Our government investment to promote the change over to a digital delivery system will be lost. Any progress gained from promotion or public awareness will be lost. Taxpayers have paid $2 billion dollars for this expenditure; which will have to be paid for again.

9. We the taxpayers are potentially going to delay or loose the $19.7 billion dollars sold in analog spectrum. The businesses who support the operations and use of the spectrum we sold will be delayed, disrupted and may never recover.

10. Last but not least the “change” we all expected from a new administration was not to be swayed by special interests – The only groups that will benefit for a digital conversion will be the special interest cable and satellite monopolies.

Just think about it, if the cable and satellite guys can stall the adoption and progress of digital over the air broadcasting long enough, they can possibly cause their competition to fail or become too weak to compete on a level playing field.

Posted by: Gary Murphy | Jan 24, 2009 5:41:43 PM

I think all this rush rush stinks.
It sounds like the Iraq war and
the NON stimulus package which has done nothing buy make the rich richer. The DOW was at 7900 again yesterday.

Posted by: ChicagoBob | Jan 24, 2009 8:36:48 AM

Remember, FDR wooed the public and then did what he wanted. Obama has already wooed the public and so they will not open their eyes to see what he is really doing until it is too late.

Posted by: Kentuckian | Jan 23, 2009 4:24:23 PM

This bill is exactly what Obama promised, health care for the masses paid for by our tax dollars. The medical profession will survive.

Posted by: Kentuckian | Jan 23, 2009 4:22:59 PM

What's left of the economy exists on borrowed money. Try doing that at home.

Any stimulus that adds to the debt is going to be short lived. One way to reintroduce cash to the economy without borrowing is to, as the banks go out of business, forgive the loans that they hold instead of selling them to other banks for pennies on the dollar.

Posted by: Web Smith | Jan 23, 2009 3:28:04 PM

Is His plan to "stimulate" the West by provoking nuclear war in the mideast?

Maybe that's NOT such a great idea.

Posted by: Belle Starr | Jan 23, 2009 3:23:22 PM

Obama -- or SOMEbody ... -- seems to have launched more robo-war on SOMEbody in Pakistan today.

Gibbs wouldn't talk about this. Why NOT?

Posted by: Belle Starr | Jan 23, 2009 3:16:43 PM

"We're getting exactly what he indicated."

Not exactly: He NEGLECTED to mention He intended to exclude the press from "public" events.

Posted by: Belle Starr | Jan 23, 2009 3:12:01 PM

President Obama is setting in motion things he committed to during the election - and he's doing it at a very effective rate.

We're getting exactly what he indicated.

The 'right wing' is so unused to this type of behavior they have to attack it with any scrap they can pull out of their paranoid minds.

Can't blame them for being paranoid about government after the last 8 years.

Posted by: pefros | Jan 23, 2009 2:55:51 PM

"There are plenty of planned projects in various stages that did not have the funding to go forward."

That because they were pork projects that wouldnt be approved on their own merits, but if its free money then game on.

These are sink hole that have limited gdp residual value. Like hiring someone to dig a hole in your backyard and then fill it in.

Posted by: BertieW | Jan 23, 2009 2:52:13 PM

"You cant plan, scope, bid and build massive infrastructure projects in one year."

There are plenty of planned projects in various stages that did not have the funding to go forward.

Posted by: Ryan C | Jan 23, 2009 2:46:32 PM

The Transparency Team doesn't seem to be doing so hot ... especially Gibbs.

So far, they look to be MORE, not less, secretive than Cheney-Bush.

Posted by: Belle Starr | Jan 23, 2009 2:45:53 PM

The old saying goes you have to spend money to make money,At least President Obama wants to Invest in America create JOBS And try to fix our Economy, unlike Bush who sunk our money in Iraq and Afghanistan. As far as the Republicans go for once in their pathetic party could they be Bi Partisan and work with the Dems on rebuilding America after their President Bush nearly Destoyed it FED UP AND SICK OF THE GOP!!! The country spoke loud and clear Republicans on Nov 4, I suggest if you want your Dead party to come back to life then stop being so Damned selfish and for gods sake think about your country and the people and be BiPartisan work with our new President!

Posted by: Angie | Jan 23, 2009 2:39:16 PM

CBO = Congressional Budget Office
OMB = Office of Management and Budget (excutive branch)

Posted by: William J. LePetomane | Jan 23, 2009 2:21:37 PM

Sunlen Miller writes:
"I know that it is a heavily lift to do something as substantial as we're doing right now," said Obama."

Uh, did He really say "a heavily lift"?

Posted by: Ruth Roman | Jan 23, 2009 2:13:21 PM

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid indicated that the was significant discussion within today’s meeting about the CBO numbers --- which concluded that only $26 billion out of $358 billion in infrastructure and other appropriated spending would be delivered into the economy by the end of the budget year."

Ha! That has been obvious to any non-Koolaid drinker.

You cant plan, scope, bid and build massive infrastructure projects in one year.

The stimulus rationale is a cover to smuggle massive pork into districts where local politicos will use it for pay-for-play to aggrandize their empires.

Posted by: BertieW | Jan 23, 2009 1:59:57 PM


The Republicans will vote against the economic stimulus package. Go Republicans!

Posted by: anonymous | Jan 23, 2009 1:58:57 PM

CBO?? OMB??

As a reporter you should not assume that readers, who may not spend their lives in the beltway, know these acronyms.

Sorry - but this mars an otherwise informative post.

(My apologies in advance if you did introduce them. I could not find them.)

Posted by: jmmx | Jan 23, 2009 1:35:21 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS