Politically, Stimulus Fight Has Just Begun

Washington Post: In Aftermath Of Bill's Passage, Parties Position Themselves To Claim Credit, Cast Blame

(Washingtonpost.com)  This story was written by Washington Post Staff Writers Michael D. Shear and Paul Kane.

---

Thanks to the party-line nature of Congress's votes on the economic stimulus package, the plan to turn around the worst financial crisis facing the country in more than 50 years now carries not only enormous fiscal stakes but also political stakes that are nearly as large.

President Obama's advisers are betting that the historic legislation he will sign tomorrow will bear fruit quickly, and they plan to do everything they can to highlight evidence of it creating the jobs he has promised. That public relations effort kicks off tomorrow as a two-day swing through the West begins.

But the Republican Party has made its own bet: that the stimulus package that Democrats rushed through Congress will have been deemed a failure by the time the 2010 elections arrive, leading voters to rebuke Obama and reward the GOP with much-needed victories.

Whichever side proves to be right, the sharp, partisan lines over the stimulus bill make it plain that both parties intend to exact a political cost over last week's votes. And their leaders are looking to history for inspiration as they consider how to maneuver in the weeks and months ahead.

For Democrats, the guide is Franklin D. Roosevelt, who even with unemployment still above 20 percent led House Democrats to pick up nine seats in the 1934 midterm elections. Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., carries with him "Traitor to His Class," a new biography of how FDR built the Democratic domination that endured for three decades.

But Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), the House minority whip who led the fight to deny Obama every GOP vote for the plan, is studying Winston Churchill's role leading the Tories in the late 1930s, a principled minority that was eventually catapulted into power over the Labor Party. He calls the stimulus bill "a stinker."

If the economy turns around, Obama could eventually benefit much as President Bill Clinton did after pushing his economic recovery plan through Congress in 1993 with little Republican support.

Far smaller than Obama's bill, Clinton's was nonetheless controversial at the time, requiring Vice President Al Gore to cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate. Republicans insisted then that the bill would be an albatross around Clinton's neck. And they succeeded in using the controversial tax increases to help them sweep into power in the midterm elections of 1994, when Newt Gingrich (Ga.) led a revolution of young and conservative House members.

But when the sluggish economy rocketed off several years later, Clinton claimed full credit and used Republican opposition to the legislation as fuel for his successful bid for reelection.

Now it is Obama's turn, and the political stakes -- like the mammoth bill itself -- are much larger. Obama has acknowledged that little else he does in the next four years will affect his legacy if jobs and prosperity have not returned.

"Now, look, I won't lie to you," Obama told a crowd in Fort Myers, Fla., last week. "If it turns out that a few years from now people don't feel like the economy's turned around, that we're still having problems, that folks are still unemployed, that our health-care system's not more efficient, then, you know, you guys won't applaud me the next time I come down here.

The president never shied from calling the stimulus package "my bill" while stumping for it around the country. With only three Republicans supporting the measure in Friday's votes, there is almost no political cover for Obama if it doesn't work.

And Republicans have made it clear that they intend to try to shift the economic debate toward concern about the federal deficit.

They are also preparing to use the ballooning deficit to renew their push for additional tax cuts. Groups including the Club for Growth and GOP leaders such as former House speaker Gingrich say such cuts would do more to improve the economy than the spending plan would.

"The Republicans' job is to say, 'Here's a model we know is going to work,' " Gingrich said in an interview."If they do that, they will be astonished at how good 2010 will be."

Democrats have "taken a huge gamble," he added. "I can't imagine them spending $780 billion without so many examples of waste and corruption. Big bureaucratic spending . . . it never works."

Republicans rarely worried aloud about the deficit during the spending spree of George W. Bush's presidency, as Bush largely ignored the mounting red ink as he waged war in Iraq and battled terrorism. Many conservative Republicans, including Sen. John McCain, R- Ariz., blamed last year's congressional and presidential losses on the lack of fiscal discipline shown by their party under Bush's leadership.

But the massive stimulus plan has given Republicans a political opportunity to try to erase the memory of those years by convincing the country that they have found religion again when it comes to spending.

Cantor says bluntly that Obama and Democrats have decided to "assume ownership of the era of the bailout." And he predicted that voters will recoil at the prospect of huge and growing deficits and an increase in the size and role of the federal government in their lives.

"I think the 2010 elections certainly will be a test for the mandate of change that this administration was elected with," Cantor said Saturday. "I do think that there will be a price to pay.

But some Republicans worry that it could be their party paying that price.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., one of the three Republicans who voted for the legislation, said the GOP risks becoming "the party of Hoover," echoing a warning that Vice President Richard B. Cheney delivered last year during negotiations over the Bush administration's rescue of the auto industry.

After Hoover left office in 1933, amid the economic rubble of the Great Depression, Specter noted, "not until Eisenhower came up decades later did a Republican win the presidency, and he was a war hero."

In the coming weeks, if the stimulus package works as Democrats have described, federal money flowing into state coffers may allow many governors to announce that fewer layoffs are necessary. Construction projects that were delayed could start up again, providing much-needed work for laid-off construction workers. Consumer confidence could rebound, sending people to the stores again.

Obama will be poised to take credit for such successes -- and he will -- regardless of whether they are a result of the legislation.

"We stand as Democrats ready to be accountable to the American people for this legislation and for the results we predict it will bring," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said shortly after the bill passed the House on Friday.

Karl Rove, Bush's top political adviser, predicted just that kind of Democratic bragging in an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal late last week: "If history is a guide, sometime late this year or early next, the economy will rebound on its own. When that happens, Democrats will argue that their un-targeted, permanent spending actually revived the economy."

If Rove is right, Republicans could find themselves answering uncomfortable questions from their constituents about their no votes.

In the meantime, much depends on which party succeeds in shaping public opinion about the effect of the legislation.

The president's aides appeared yesterday on morning news programs to begin lowering expectations. Press secretary Robert Gibbs warned on CNN's "State of the Union" that it will take time before people see improvement in their lives.

"I think it's safe to say that things have not yet bottomed out," Gibbs said. "They are probably going to get worse before they improve. But this is a big step forward toward making that improvement and putting people back to work."

For his part, Rove believes the 2010 elections could be a victory for the GOP.

"The president won this legislative battle," he said in the Wall Street Journal column, "but at a high price -- fiscally and politically."

[starleo146]

In 2010, when the economy starts improving because of Obama''''s plan, these cowards should be booted from the Congress. Each and every one of them!Posted by briannorwood at 12:22 PM : Feb 17, 2009


They should be booted out irregardless if just on principle, until they learn this country is not made up of just big business, not just wall street, not just our buddies like Haliburton, it is made of of poor and middle class who were shoved in a corner till all their dealings were done. Never once giving us a moment of thought.well we proved at the voting booth we are not having it anymore and the next batch of republicans will find out how serious we are. Every time Obama moves ahead they, the republicans shout BOO HOO even louder. 2010 can not come soon enough,as long as one republican is in the halls that represent America cannot happen soon enough

[starleo146]

And you can''''''''t complain about the democrats doing it, when the republicans did the exact same thing in the 109th and 108th congresses!!

Posted by hungry686 at 09:06 AM : Feb 17, 2009

They are supposed to be there representing me. I can complain all i want if I think they are doing a poor job.

Posted by endurorob at 09:20 AM : Feb 17, 200

Look, Obama was inaugurated as President on January 20th 2009 and it isn''t even Feb20th, 2009 and you blame him for this mess, where are your brains I know up the Republicans arse, This mess was here when Obama got elected they were good on keeping it quiet, hoped no one would find out till after the election, but the banks are failing, the republicans can''t have that, so they scream for 350billion and they pay off their buddies, and leave, and left Obama trying to clean it up, and you shout they left us out, so we are not doing nothing. The way you cut the bill down, and now say it not enough to help. You and every Republican should hang your head in shame for what you have done to your country

[starleo146]

The National Security said this economy crisis will be our worst security issue as of today. They expect people to revolt and who would blame them , no house, no job, no money, great job Republicans. I feel you are the terrorists in this country, to bring us down to this level all because you made a mess of this country and you do not want Obama to succeed, every time a democrat gets in you start demonizing the democrats for things you did, and I pray it doesn''t work this time for the countries sake.

[starleo146]

But the Republican Party has made its own bet: that the stimulus package that Democrats rushed through Congress will have been deemed a failure by the time the 2010 elections arrive, leading voters to rebuke Obama and reward the GOP with much-needed victories.

Yes they think they know and if they do not stop putting doom in peoples mind day after day they will succeed in finally finishing the job they started by finishing this country once and for all. Is this bipartisanship they keep asking for. They do not know the meaning of cooperation because they do not know how, they would rather try to destroy Obama than save the country from a catastrophe.There Propaganda has to stop for all our sakes and we need every American to shut them up today.We will remember who didn''t help in this crisis believe me.They let Wall street have a clean bill of health in this, and the republicans and wall street together are the blame not Obama, How about shouting those words MR. and MRS REPUBLUCASN

[briannorwood]

The Everlasting GOP Stoppers have doubled down their bets. Hoping that the economy gets worse by the 2010 elections. How pathetic.

In 2010, when the economy starts improving because of Obama''s plan, these cowards should be booted from the Congress. Each and every one of them!

[enriquecaliente]

8 Years of Republican rule got us all here.

Trickle down economy doesn''t work, cause the people at the top won''t let anything trickle down to those that do the actual heavy lifting.

The Banks created this market, with the help of the politicians and now they''re crying.

This use of credit cards should be outlawed, it''s like drugs. The use of them gives people the false sense of living the high life. They (Govt and the Bankers) knew full well what people would do. And like the tobacco companies fed us this idea that credit was a good thing. They created it, let them take the hit and swallow it.

8 Years and the Repubs did nothing.

[hatesthecolt]

I find it interesting that some economists are saying the stimulus package will fail because it''s not big enough. How ironic if the stimulus package would fail to the political benefit of the republicans because the republicans advocated for less spending and the spending was ultimately inadequate.

[hatesthecolt]

I find it interesting that some economists are saying the stimulus package will fail because it''s not big enough. How ironic if the stimulus package would fail to the political benefit of the republicans because the republicans advocated for less spending and the spending was ultimately inadequate.

[endurorob]

WHAT social programs are you talking about?!?!?

Only Fox News is claiming that there are "recurring social programs" in it!!

Everything in the stimulus bill, is a ONE TIME shot!!!

Here''''s the latest:

http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/
PressSummary02-12-09.pdf
Posted by hungry686 at 09:18 AM : Feb 17, 20

Start with the pragrams listed below. Do you actually believe that once this additional funding starts that it will end?
By the way the link is just a summery written by a couple of dem senetors and staffers.
$19.9 billion for additional Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly Food
Stamps, to increase the benefit by 13.6 percent.
%u2010 Child Care Development Block Grant: $2 billion to provide quality child care services for an
additional 300,000 children in low-income families who increasingly are unable to afford the high
cost of day care.
%u2010 Head Start & Early Head Start: $2.1 billion to allow an additional 124,000 children to participate
in this program, which provides development, educational, health, nutritional, social and other
activities that prepare children to succeed in school.

[endurorob]

And you can''''t complain about the democrats doing it, when the republicans did the exact same thing in the 109th and 108th congresses!!

Posted by hungry686 at 09:06 AM : Feb 17, 2009

They are supposed to be there representing me. I can complain all i want if I think they are doing a poor job.

[endurorob]

The amount of money these people make is obscene, but their pay levels SHOULD NOT be regulated by the government.

But I haven''''t heard that Obama wants to limit compensation for ALL executives. Do you have a link, or is this more Fox News fear mongering?


Posted by hungry686 at 09:13 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I don''t want to make the effort to find the story but it was on this site. It was when the story of the limited salaries first came out and it said the Obama administration was recommending not only salary caps for those recieving tarp funds but for all corporate execs. I can''t make up that kind of crazy s.h.i.t. I don''t have that good of an imagination.

[endurorob]

They probably didn''''t read it. But they know what''''s in it, since it was just created.

And you can''''t complain about the democrats doing it, when the republicans did the exact same thing in the 109th and 108th congresses!!

Posted by hungry686 at 09:06 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I am willing to bet you cold scan the bill, find some random item and ask a senetor about it and you would have a 50-50 chance he/she would say "I didn''t know that was in there" I have heard that many times. I also saw an interview of one of the dem reps. and he flat out said Pelosi told them not to worry about reading it just shut up and vote yes.

[endurorob]

Uh huh.

Then WHERE did you get the proof of your claims to back up your post at 8:46?

I heard that yesterday, almost word for word, on Fox news.

Posted by hungry686 at 09:03 AM : Feb 17, 2009


As i stated earlier I was too busy yesterday to watch any news. My claims from 8:46 are based partly on the fact that your man Obama had preciously stated that the "Stimulus Package" would be targeted and temporary. My opinions on the additional socila programs is from the excerpts I have seen of the package and the history of social programs in this country, once they begin it is almost impossoble to stop them. You give people something for free once and many of them expect to keep getting it.

[endurorob]

The government started to subsidize the banks in the 1990''''s, but they didn''''t do anything to regulate the banks and their highly questionable business and loan practices that caused the mess.

That''''s Bush and his "TARP" policy - not Obama''''s current solution.

I''''m hoping that Obama and Geithner are going to impose MASSIVE amounts of regulations on the banking industry, (with congressional approval, of course), to prevent them from doing ANYTHING questionable ever again.

They should permanently eliminate "credit default swaps", "deferred interest loans", "Pick a Pay loans", and eliminate the practice of trading mortgages like securities or bonds.

Posted by hungry686 at 09:01 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I am all for limited regulation of not only banks but all industry. And I do mean limited. The Obama folks are talking about wanting to limit executive compensation not only for the banks that take the bailout loans but all bamks and that is not at all acceptable.

[endurorob]

Posted by hungry686 at 08:51 AM : Feb 17, 2009


Something else to ponder. All those representatives and senetors voted for this bill less than 12 hours after it''s final version was completed. How could they possibly have been able to read and understand what is in this thing especially when so much of it refernces other documents. They voted for it because Pelosi and Reid told them to.

[endurorob]

You have nothing substantive to base your claims on, other than "Fox News told me......"

Posted by hungry686 at 08:51 AM : Feb 17, 2009

I watch all the news with the exception of MSNBC and read CBSnews.com, CNN.com, and FOXnews.com. I also read the washington post and times. I base my opinions on many sources.

[endurorob]

That''''s what the Japanese said about the 1990''''s.

They now refer to that as "the lost decade".



And NOW you''''re crying about "wasteful spending"?

Where the hell were you for eight years?

How much money do you think was wasted, just because Bush REFUSED to open government contracted jobs to the competitive bidding process?

Please! I agree that wasteful spending is a massive problem, but don''''t save your complaints for just the democratic president!

Posted by hungry686 at 08:46 AM : Feb 17, 2009

when Bush was in office I complained about his bad policies but he is gone and now it is the new guys turn. As far as the Japanese lost decade. They did not do nothing. They did the same thing Obama is doing and it was a major failure. As a matter of fact I think one estimate I heard was they ended up pouring something like $11T into the economy. It failed and that is the basic model this spending bill is based on.

[endurorob]

Posted by hungry686 at 08:40 AM : Feb 17, 2009

Whats being apposed is the numerous social programs added inot this thing. This was supposed to be targeted and temporary. The social programs added will not go away so that is not temporary and they will have to be funded. If you pay income tax you better expect to see those taxes increase drastically in the next couple of years.

[endurorob]

You''''re opposing it, and you haven''''t even read it?!?!?


http://www.rules.house.gov/
111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf


Posted by hungry686 at 08:31 AM : Feb 17, 2009

Are you sure this is the latest? The date on it is Jan 23. Yes I have read portions of it when available. And I have read excerpts from many websites.

[endurorob]

Perhaps you could tell us what his bad policies are?

Fixing the republican destroyed economy? Getting funding to repair our infrastructure that was neglected for the last 8 years? Putting money into education for a change?



Or maybe you could define his "poor leadership abilities".

Posted by hungry686 at 08:29 AM : Feb 17, 2009

The economy would fix itself if left alone and what he is doing is at best a bandage with a very high price tag. If the government would make an effort to cut wastefull spending, all governments local to federal, then the funding to fix infrastructure could be had without this excessive borrowing that will have to be paid back.