Time for a Second Stimulus?

Topics: Economic Stimulus

CBS Evening News' Nancy Cordes reported Wednesday on a House oversight committee hearing on President Obama's economic stimulus package. The hearing comes after a report showed that the stimulus funds are being used for day-to-day operations in many states and not reaching the poor and jobless areas that need them most.

Some Democrats are talking about seeking a second stimulus even as the defend the first, but Republicans are staunchly opposed. CBS Moneywatch.com editor-at-large Jill Schlesinger joined Evening News anchor Katie Couric to discuss the possibility of a second stimulus and more.

Couric: Would a second stimulus package be good for the economy?

Schlesinger: Well when we talk about a stimulus we are talking about taxpayer money. Right now we are borrowing to try to stimulate the economy. That means we will have a bill to pay back in the future. So we must think very clearly about what that means. On the other hand, as Nancy just said, we've only seen 11 percent of the money get spent. That means the lion's share of that stimulus package is to come. So maybe we've got to a little bit to see how things work out through the economy

Couric:So patience may be the operative word even though a lot of people are getting impatient. One of the goals of this package was to increase consumer confidence so people will start spending and put money into the economy. But a report out today – a government report – shows consumers are saving and not spending. So how can we turn that around?

Schlesinger: If you are a family and you are in trouble, you can't go out and spend freely. That would be silly. We want people to act responsibly. But if you are a family, you've got jobs, and things are okay, maybe you don't have to be paralyzed in that fear state – you can spend a little bit. You know, in the long run, Katie, if people live responsibly and take control of their financial lives, we will have a stronger economy. It just may take some time.

14 Comments +

Add a Comment See all 14 Comments


by keystonebull July 9, 2009 4:56 PM EDT: You are wrong here. Most Americans want to see Obama gone because of his policies. Many people voted for him thinking he would be better than what he is doing. The American people could care less about race, it is the policies that count. I see him spending this country into bankruptcy and you know I'm right. I honestly don't believe the polls and feel if the election was held today he would lose. Darn sure of it in 2012 and we will be in bad financial shape. You think health care is expensive, just wait till it is free. You need to spend a few months in England or Europe where they are sick of their health care system. I have been over there.; Reply to this comment


by dennisall77 July 9, 2009 12:35 PM EDT: Let me ask the conservatives here a question: If you had only two choices, 1. The economy recovers in two months and Obama is re-elected in 2012, or 2. The economy tanks and people starve and suffer for 3 years and Obama is NOT re-elected... which would you prefer?

I doubt ANY conservative here will really choose one or the other, but I suspect if they had the cajones to choose one, they would choose #2 because they secretly would rather have millions of people suffer than see Obama re-elected. They truly want him to fail and part of the reason things are still sagging is that the REPUGS are sabotaging his efforts solely for selfish reasons: they want the POWER back; Reply to this comment


by hamiltongrad July 9, 2009 11:10 AM EDT: The first was and is a disaster: All to Social Programs and none virtually creating jobs.
FDR set up 7 REGIONAL committees, that undertook REAL JOB MAKING projects, such as water and dam projects that TRANSFORMED the nation, and created real growth, prosperity and JOBS. He did not just give the STATES more money to prop up failing social/medical/ teacher unions.

Knowing History is important. We can learn not only from the mistakes, but also from what worked.

We need MAJOR Projects, that are TRANSFORMATIVE, CAPTURE OUR IMAGINATION/ keep us a head/ not just PAYOFFS to special interest LEFT WING voter blocks, or ( time to shake your head) ACORN.; Reply to this comment


by hwy71so July 9, 2009 11:01 AM EDT: NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!; Reply to this comment

by gravyboat4000 July 9, 2009 9:48 AM EDT

"Time for a second stimulus?"

Can I have a smoke and a bite to eat, the first stimulus really wore me out...

Reply to this comment


by gravyboat4000 July 9, 2009 9:54 AM EDT: bUT I DID NOT RUN FOR NOTHIN.

ICECREAMS?


by TheMasses0009 July 9, 2009 10:55 AM EDT: I want ICECREAMS too .............

by SomeGuy_9128 July 9, 2009 9:22 AM EDT

Absolutely no way should there be a second "stimulus Package". The money from the first is not all spent, there hasn't been enough time to see how its working. But first and foremost, this country needs to quit borrowing money. The collosal debt we currently carry is going to be our undoing. Only fools would add to it at the rate a second stimulus package would bring. Write your congressmen now and let them know this should not be allowed.

Reply to this comment


by ubrew12 July 9, 2009 10:08 AM EDT: until the risk of hyperinflation outweighs the risk of deflation, I disagree with you. We are spiraling into depression, the big D. Private spending and investment is shut down, which ironically, shuts it down even further. The stimulus packages pry the national psyche back open again and make it think that there could possibly be a future.

This patient owes a horrible debt that's for sure. But, stop treating him now until he pays it and he may die, in which case you get nothing.


by hwy71so July 9, 2009 11:02 AM EDT: I don't trust Obama for much of anything beyond getting us even deeper in debt and further weakening our military.

by CPelzar July 9, 2009 9:21 AM EDT

Each job created or saved (LOL) so far has cost us close to 400K per job. This is a joke

Reply to this comment


by the74blaster July 9, 2009 9:50 AM EDT: The problem with the stimulus packages is they did not put money into the hands of the people to spend. Bushs stimulus was flawed in that it gave too little and Obamas is flawed in that its taking too long.

Obamas idea is correct but the lag time is killing us. What is needed are jobs so peope have money to spend and pay their bills off. Sitting back and letting companies export jobs offshore in the name of free trade is the root cause of this economic slow down.

Obama needs to kill all the tax benefits of moving offshore or implement a natonal sales tax and allow very few tax credits.

For example, the only allowabl tax credits I would allow if I was dictator is.

1. 100% deduction if the company employs 100% American citizens.
2. 100% write off for investments made to rebuild the American industrial infrastructure.
3. Costs of trainig American workers.

To pay for it, well lets just say having a manufacturing operaton offshore would make a company uncompetitive in the American market place.


by ubrew12 July 9, 2009 9:57 AM EDT: 60% of the first stimulus was in tax breaks to win GOP votes that weren't needed, and in extension of unemployment benefits. Those kicked in immediately and did bupkiss. The rest is slowly trickling in as gov't projects, aid to states, etc, but it was never going to be enough, and many economists said so at the outset. Furthermore, Obama's approach to the finance sector has been expensive and rewards failure. We should have nationalized them, dumped their managements, refinanced and privatized them, broken them up, and resold them. Instead we're throwing tons of money at them and their gaming the price of oil: 'business' as usual.

Obama needs to realize that the GOP drove us off this cliff. THATS why they are unpopular. Why go with half-measures to appear bipartisan? Desperate times call for desperate measures: don't reward bankers for mismanaging their industry, and put a stimulus package out there that FDR would be proud of. The cost of 'making nice' to Republicans and their banksters is millions of people out of work.