Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama: Senate Dems' jobs bill is too expensive

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:29 PM
Original message
Obama: Senate Dems' jobs bill is too expensive
The Obama administration on Tuesday night might have thrown a wrench into Senate Democratic plans to pass what they see as a jobs bill — by implying the bill spends too much money.

In a Statement of Administration Policy, the White House said it supports the broad goals of the bill.

"However, the bill would authorize spending levels higher than those requested by the president’s Budget, and the administration believes that the need for smart investments that help America win the future must be balanced with the need to control spending and reduce the deficit," the administration said.

The comment on the price of the bill is likely to be seized upon by Senate Republicans as a further reason to reject it, and could undermine Senate Democrats' effort to build support for it.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/165299-white-house-says-senate-dem-jobs-bill-too-expensive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
1. Fuck jobs! We have a $2 billion a week war in Afghanistan to run.
Not to mention Iraq, Pakistan and Libya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
villager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Took the words right out of my mouth. So glad we voted for "change..."
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. We need "smart investments"....like unmanned drones.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. yes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humbled_opinion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Might as well add Syria, Iran, Egypt, Yemen to the list
I guess we will really know he has crossed over when he launches the attacks against Kenya... Sheesh... Where in the hell is the Anti-War movement? All it would take is one good protest and we could end all these senseless wars.... We are the Change remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 04:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
25. Exactly.
As long as we wage these ridiculous wars no one should say anything is too expensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Obamanaut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
27. And a new carrier and some aircraft to go on it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
5. How fucking sweet is that.
:grr: I don't think he has a clue what it's like out here in real life. God forbid Senate republicans find a reason to reject it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Not very sweet, quite bitter to me. I think I'll go drink some
straight vermouth to see if that nasty stuff will help with the bitter taste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:48 PM
Original message
Screw the vermouth, just get a nice smooth
vodka. But I don't think there is any way to get rid of the bitter taste.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
17. I despise vermouth as I find it bitter and thought it might be an
improvement, lol! I'm not a fan of vodka, perhaps some cheap tequila straight without salt or lime?

That might temporarily rid me of the bitter taste!}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Try the cheap tequila, just make sure its' a clear one and
forget the salt and lime, use a thick slice of orange. That will go down smooth and wipe out the bitter. Trust me on this.:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. well, I'd drink some Johnny Walker but can't drink anymore
Edited on Wed Jun-08-11 06:30 PM by fascisthunter
so I'll have to spark up a fat joint and giggle for a little while.

Cheers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Ooh, ooh, I just found the Jimmy Buffett lime infused tequila!!!
I think I'll use a 'tin cup for a chalice'. With this news and all of Weinergate I need a 'license to chill'. Soon I may be 'off to see the lizard' in 'one particular harbor', but first I think I should get on 'the coconut telegraph' and see if 'Lola and Frank' would like to come along.

We could just stay home and have 'boat drinks', then we wouldn't have to worry about the 'gypsies in the palace' house sitting for us...we could just be 'fruitcakes' hanging together...forget that 'get drunk and screw'...not gonna happen.

Humor challenged...sigh...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
23. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Northerner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:37 PM
Response to Original message
6. K&R nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
7. Stop with the lame win the future nonsense
We can't even "win the present" at the moment. Cutting the deficit will create zero jobs and earn Obama zero votes in 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
8. Obama needs an R next to his name...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
9. Here's the President's statement
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

S. 782 – Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011
(Sen. Boxer, D-California, and 4 cosponsors)

The Administration supports Senate passage of S. 782. The bill provides the Commerce Department’s Economic Development Administration (EDA) with important tools to help America’s communities meet the challenges of innovation-led economic growth. However, the bill would authorize spending levels higher than those requested by the President’s Budget, and the Administration believes that the need for smart investments that help America win the future must be balanced with the need to control spending and reduce the deficit. The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to enact legislation that helps EDA enhance its mission of assisting America’s distressed communities in forging partnerships with the private sector to create jobs.


The President supports the bill, but simply reiterated his rationale for the amount included in his budget.

One of the cosponsors is Inhofe so it's likely the bill will pass.

Legislation would leverage private sector investment to create thousands of jobs

Washington, DC - Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, spoke on the Senate floor today as debate began on bipartisan legislation that she introduced to reauthorize the Economic Development Administration (EDA), which provides investments in infrastructure and other projects to economically distressed communities.

The Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011, S. 782, would enable the EDA to continue to support important economic development projects and drive local economic growth. According to EDA, each dollar invested has historically attracted nearly seven dollars in private sector investment. Since January of 2009, EDA has supported projects that have created an estimated 161,500 jobs and saved nearly 45,000 jobs.

The following are Senator Boxer's floor remarks as prepared for delivery:

Mr. President, I rise today in support of S. 782, the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011, which will reauthorize the Economic Development Administration (EDA) at $500 million annually for five years (Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015).

S. 782 has bipartisan support and was reported out of the EPW Committee by voice vote on April 14, 2011. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) are cosponsors.

For nearly fifty years, EDA has created jobs and spurred growth in economically hard-hit communities nationwide. S. 782 will ensure that EDA will continue to create employment opportunities, maintain existing jobs, and drive local economic growth.

<...>






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #9
29. If he's not willing to put some money where his mouth is then he doesn't support the bill.
Talk and double talk is cheap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Here's the problem:
The focus is almost entirely on the President. A lot of what he says is ignored to focus on spin, mostly to create a negative impression of his efforts. For example, this report from May 25 got little attention: Obama's transportation plan to shrink in the Senate

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama's sweeping spending plan for roads, rail and bridges is shrinking as it travels through Congress.

In the next two weeks, the Senate will begin considering legislation to authorize about $339 billion over six years for transportation, Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer told reporters on Wednesday.

That is less than two-thirds of the $556 billion package Obama proposed in February.

<...>

The Senate is considering a stand-alone bill to create a national infrastructure bank, which Obama has pushed since his presidential campaign, with an appropriation of $5 billion a year.

Obama's initiative to spend $53 billion on high-speed rail will be taken up in separate legislation, Boxer said.

<...>


Yet, this was the big news yesterday is the OP article. Never mind that he issued a routine statement in support of legislation, which already has Republican support.

So the Senate wanting to add $200 million to Obama's proposal means he's a sell out, even though he isn't opposing the bill.

On the other hand, the Senate cutting more than $200 billion from his proposal gets no attention.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. At this point in time I am not sure which is a better way
To let this administration slowly destroy this country or just sit back and let the republicans destroy it in one fell swoop.
He wanted $325 million. It is at $300 million right now. Congress wanted $500 million. Perhaps Obama is under the impression that you always start negotiations at or lower than what you want and then you magically get that exact amount.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. "Smart investments"? Are we even going to go there, Mr. President? SMART INVESTMENTS?
Like your fucking smart investment that sits to the East of Iran and to the West of Pakistan? Like that kind of smart investment? Like the smart investment we've got on the East end of Cuba- like that kind of Smart Investment™?

Is this "Change"? This is fucked!

We're on the way down folks and when it comes to guns or butter- looks like guns are a "smarter investment" than you are!

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. Gee, thanks Mr. O!
Really, really appreciate that kick-ass big-D Democratic attitude you got there! Way to support the Congressional troops! Way to rally support for the party that stands shoulder to shoulder with the little guys.

Gaak.

We have utterly dismal job numbers, the Republicans are playing cutthroat, and he's still trying to appease them.

Well Mr. President, at least you named your program right: W.T.F.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. 'Way to support the Congressional troops! Way to rally support for the party'
Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
15. We have more important things to spend money on
By the way, for those who don't quite get it, what the President is saying is that we need to spend money on tax breaks for Big Oil, not jobs. We need to spend money funding a lower tax rate for Charlie Sheen and Paris Hilton, not jobs. Sure, he can say that he supports the broad goals of the bill, he just doesn't want to inconvenience wealthy people to do it. If only it didn't cost anything! Then, by golly, President Obama and his administration would surely support a jobs bill. Or find another reason not to endorse it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
20. Jobs. Who needs them?
Certainly not the campaign donors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-08-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. +
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 06:14 AM
Response to Original message
26. And the hits just keep on coming
One wonder who Obama is thinking will vote for him next year. He keeps pissing off one group of constituents after another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. :nodding:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 06:24 AM
Response to Original message
28. I swear he is trying to lose n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madville Donating Member (743 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. He might want to at this point n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
33. But we can find the money to bomb Libya. go figure. The
defense industry isn't starving because they're too big too fail. The People of the United States not so much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4879155
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-11 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC