The World Newser is World News' daily blog. Here, you'll find our staff's thoughts on the day's news and the way we build our broadcast. Plus, we'll share reports from our team of correspondents in the field, as well as producers behind-the-scenes.
RECENT POSTS
- Documenting the Planet's Demise -- One Striking Photograph at a Time
- President Obama Answers Questions From Anti-Castro Blogger
- Jim Sciutto: A Tiny Town Salutes Its Fallen
- 10 Reasons the Belgians Hate the British
- Is Swine Flu Ebbing?
- Susan Boyle's First Album Makes Amazon CD Sales History
- Another Day, Another Recommendation to Relax Screening for Women
- Clem's Chronicles: Hasan's Emails/FAA outage/Afghanistan
- Herman Who? Unknown Chosen For First EU President
- Eight Years Later: 'Most Dangerous Place To Be Born'
- "New Moon" Turns Daughter Into Lobbyist
- Empty Shelves at Luxury Stores This Holiday Season?
WORLD NEWSER CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Republicans on Obama: 'They Like What They're Hearing'
January 08, 2009 2:25 PM
So reports our Jonathan Karl, from Capitol Hill. One small step for bipartisanship?
**************
Here's some change you might find hard to believe in. Republican Congressional leaders Mitch McConnell & John Boehner say they like what they are hearing so far on Obama's economic plans.
"I think we are being listened to," McConnell told reporters. "I'm pleased with what the new president's had to say so far. I don't have any complaints about the communication at this stage." McConnell said that Republicans have consulted with economists "who would be considered more conservative" and "Each of them agreed with the president, the incoming president, that we need to do a stimulus."
More McConnell: "It's clear to me from listening to the president, the new president, that he wants to include Republican ideas and among them, that I've laid out in the last few days, are reducing the middle-class tax rate."
Of course, at this point it's good politics to sound bi-partisan with a popular incoming president. The Republican leaders, however did repeatedly express concern about the potential for too much spending. "Obviously the issue is how big and what form," McConnell said. "Given the deficit numbers, it really ought not to be a trillion-dollar spending bill." And, he said, it needs to be temporary and targeted.
Boehner sounded a bi-partisan note as well, but repeatedly raised concerns about too much deficit spending:
"It's going to be our kids and their kids" who pay the debt, he said. "And we can't bury them under the debt, and we can't buy prosperity with more and more government spending."
Later on the Senate floor (at 11:30), Senator Judd Gregg, the top Republican on the Budget Committee also warned about deficit spending, saying the country is facing "a fiscal tsunami."
Gregg: "It is obvious that we need a robust stimulus package right now and it is very obvious that we need to have it sooner rather than later. And from my standpoint as a member of the republican party, which is in opposition here arguably, I want to work with the other side of the aisle and with the president-elect to accomplish it, because I don't think we can afford partisan politics at this time. we need to govern.
January 8, 2009 in Economy, Obama, Barack, President 44 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (10)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The Republicans should move as far away from Obama's plan as possible. The Democrats have enough votes to pass the stimulus plan themselves. Let them - let them assume the blame for making the economic problem worse by driving our debt up even higher.
Posted by: James | Jan 8, 2009 3:05:39 PM
You seem to forget it was Bush that started this bailout and after eight years of Bush look at the state the country is in. Obama is just inheriting Bush’s legacy, America as you see it now!
Posted by: rickyt1234 | Jan 8, 2009 3:20:07 PM
why wasn't these republicans conserned about the deficit under bush. we now have more debt than ever from a president that inherited a surplus, but of course now is the time to show restaint (stupidity)lets not save the economy for the democrats but it's ok to spend for the republicans. when do we the americans get control over congress. looks like time for a new congress with no incumbents ever.time to do away with the scum that wants to be are represenatives for the rest of thier lifesat are expense.
Posted by: kurt | Jan 8, 2009 3:43:21 PM
As I have hear this stimulus plan is middle class tax cuts, allowing consumer to correct the free market and to pay off debts, and job creation via green tech, infrastructure investment, and health care reform. Some of these new jobs will also save government money in the long run, such as making fed buildings more energy efficient and are good investments. This plan seems more focused on helping consumers then the previous bailout, instead of failing banking instutions, making it much more difficult to speak out against. It is just a shame that is seems it is necessary that such a large plan is needed to prevent a prolonged repression or depression that results in job loss. After economic recovery the government should take a serious look at passing paygo rules.
Posted by: Ordermonger | Jan 8, 2009 3:52:34 PM
Who capitulated on the war. Democrats. Who was universal in opposing the bailouts (Republicans) while they and their canidate supported them. The Democrats. Who encouraged and threatened banks with penalties if they did NOT lend to subprime housing applicants? The Democrats. Your entitled to your opinion, but NOT your own facts!
Posted by: please! | Jan 8, 2009 3:53:01 PM
Please! - you make a great summary of the problem. The Democrats force banks to lend to people who cannot afford their mortgages (Community Reinvestment Act). When the Republicans warned that this would lead to an economic disaster and held hearings in 2002 and again in 2005 they called Republicans racists for wanting to return to qualification based decisions on lending. Now, after crashing the economy with their blind pursuit of loaning money to people who could not afford to repay those loans, Democrats are poised to spread their incompetence to all aspects of our lives. Obama's biggest threat will not come from Republicans; his presidency will face huge challenges from the incompetence of people like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Maxine Waters, and Nancy Pelosi.
Posted by: James | Jan 8, 2009 4:37:59 PM
James, The CRA act was indeed signed into action by pres. Carter. However, it was due to national...NATIONAL pressure that he signed it. It didn't seem like so much of a cancer until recently when all the greedy banks saw how much money they were making and started buying up all the "bad" loans and then reselling them. It's not the democrats faults...it's governments fault and the greedy banks that chose not to read the tea leaves. Quit blaming the Dems. Bush's holy war against terrorism is a sieve as well, if not moreso!
Posted by: Independent Fighter | Jan 8, 2009 5:33:39 PM
When you say 'national pressure', please clarify that. I didn't vote for this; I don't remember asking anyone to give faulty loans. This was the doings of such grous like ACORN, and, I'm pretty sure most Democrats. Remember, the republicans are the 'stingy ones', according to democrats. We're not stingy; we're practical.
Now, who wanted this bailout more than anyone? The democrats, that's who.
It was the democrats who were standing on the steps of the senate screaming -
Remember Pelosi?
Remember Barney Frank: the guy who wrote the housing and banking laws?
Remember McCain and fellow Republicans who introduced legislation for banks, but the legislation was shot down by the democrats?
Posted by: go read the headlines again | Jan 8, 2009 7:07:58 PM
If NoBo listens to Republicans he will be doing himself a favor.
When he realizes that the Republicans are actually right he will be doing the country a favor.
Posted by: Noz | Jan 8, 2009 11:18:19 PM
I think this is an AWESOME start of America's restoration!!!! I have witnessed our fiscal disolve and the devastation of the airline industry from point blank experience. As an International flight attendant for 23+ years, I was a part of the 9/11 incident, and all of it's rippling effects. I would NEVER have thought, that I worked every single day onboard an atricle which was later termed a "WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION". That in fact is the TRUTH. Why did America need see that?
A HUGE clue, should've been with Pan Am in Locherbie,Scotland. That jumbo B747 being brought down by terrorists to gain attention. Hello Osama Bin Laden says... they're on to something I can expand upon. He recruited young soldiers, to train to kill. He sent them to FLORIDA on student visas, to train to control the flight of Boeing 757/767 aircraft, which would later become his "smoking guns". Embry-Riddle Flight School should have thought it rather strange that this group didn't care about takeoff nor landing, just controlling an airborne aircraft. At any rate, they had a student visa and cash money, so they were accepted and trained.
When it was reported that Sadam Hussien was the American operation Coordinator, Bush dropped the ball in favor of Osama Bin Laden, the get Hussien brought to the USA to stand trial for murder of 5,000 innocent American's. Thank god, Hussien was captured, and stood trial in the middle East, where his sentence was to hang. YEEEHAW! How can he die more than once? Bush kept going on bring him to the USA to stand trial.
We USA soldiers found Hussien in a foxhole, I couldn't believe their first impulse would not have been SHOT FIRST.. ask questions later. Bush lost my respect back then, and as we still suffer financially in the US, I still can't forgive him.
President Elect is a breath of fresh air, and I stand fully in support of his economic recovery program. Yes, it will cost me short term, but I CAN see a future!
Posted by: Perryof1963 | Jan 9, 2009 1:15:58 AM
Post a comment

