December 17, 2009 3:42 AM

House Dems Muscle Over GOP, Pass Jobs Bill

(AP)  Democrats in the House Wednesday muscled through a year-end plan to create jobs, mixing about $50 billion for public works projects with another almost $50 billion for cash-strapped state and local governments.

The unemployed would get continued benefits. But conspicuously absent from the plan were President Obama's recently announced proposals to give Social Security recipients $250 payments, a tax credit for small businesses that create jobs and a program awarding tax credits to people who make their homes more energy efficient.

In a statement, Obama said the House measure offers "productive ideas to respond to this great need" for jobs across the country, while urging lawmakers to do more.

"Some may think standing by and taking no action is the right approach, but for the millions of Americans still out of work, inaction is unacceptable," Obama said.

Poll: For Many, Unemployment Brings Crisis

Not a single Republican voted for the plan, which passed on a 217-212 vote after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., worked the floor for an hour. The measure now goes to the Senate, which won't consider the measure until next year and which generally has a smaller appetite for such deficit-financed economic stimulus measures.

Given increasing anxiety among Democrats over massive budget deficits and the party's poor marks with voters for its free-spending ways, the measure could face a tough road. Some 38 Democrats voted against the plan, mostly moderates and junior members elected from swing districts.

According to documents released by Democrats, the measure would cost $154 billion. But there's also another $20 billion from the federal treasury to keep the highway trust fund afloat.

The measure blends a familiar mix of money for highway, transit and water projects and aid to help communities retain teachers and firefighters. There's also $41 billion for a six-month extension of more generous unemployment benefits and $12 billion to renew health insurance subsidies.

Many of the ideas are renewals of programs started in February's $787 billion economic stimulus bill, which has earned mixed reviews from the public as unemployment has hit 10 percent.

The idea behind the "Jobs for Main Street Act" was to enact fast-acting steps that would quickly boost employment. The bill also reflects concerns among rank-and-file Democrats that the original stimulus measure didn't have enough money for infrastructure projects.

But infrastructure spending is notoriously slow to spend out as projects need to be planned and can require a lengthy contracting process. Many of the so-called shovel ready projects have already been funded.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, less than half of the $39 billion in the measure for transportation and housing projects would be spent over the next decade, with just $1.7 billion being spent through next September.

Democrats claimed $75 billion of the measure is "paid for" with unused money from the Wall Street bailout. Republicans countered that the bill is really financed with red ink since the bailout money would otherwise revert to the Treasury to lower the deficit.

Republicans branded the new bill "Son of Stimulus" and were withering in their assessments.

"More spending, more debt. Same lousy policies that haven't produced jobs all year," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Democrats also say that economists largely credit the earlier stimulus measure for the fledgling economic recovery and the improving unemployment picture.

"The situation is worse than we thought and getting better more slowly than we hoped but it's clearly getting better," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.

Democrats said that the measure would prevent a double-dip recession by giving state and local governments $23 billion to retain teachers and lesser amounts to keep firefighters and police officers. And it would help prevent tax increases by state governments by giving them $23.5 billion for the Medicaid program for the poor and disabled.

Republicans also distributed a chart showing that roughly half the money goes into accounts brimming with cash from the earlier stimulus bill.

"The agencies are awash with money coming through the pipeline," said Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif.

But Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., countered that most of the earlier stimulus money has been committed if not actually spent.

The measure also includes money for Amtrak construction, school renovation and job training. There's also $1.1 billion for part-time college jobs, summer employment for low-income teenagers and money for workers in national parks and forests.

The bill also allows very poor people with as little as no income to claim a $1,000-per-child tax credit in what Republicans charged was simply a welfare payment to 16 million poor families.

The bill also would extend federal surface transportation programs through the end of next September.

Democratic leaders had to scramble to find the votes for the measure, which came up right after the House approved a $290 billion increase in the government's ability to borrow. That 218-214 vote reflected unhappiness by moderate Democrats about adding to the nation's red ink. The timing made the jobs bill vote a "heavy lift," Pelosi said.

Heading into the roll call, Pelosi was about two dozen votes short, spokesman Brendan Daly confirmed. But she lobbied indefatigably to almost single-handedly turn the tide.

"I looked at her with doubt on my face and in my eyes and she gave me that steely look and said, 'Let's call the vote,"' said party whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Add a Comment See all 79 Comments
by lakota2012 December 18, 2009 11:09 AM EST
by Kc98GT:
"Gov. Perry pointed out..."
--------------------





Still waiting to see what spending you would cut to bring down the deficit. You can easily point fingers and complain just like the entire miNOrity party, but your GOP has NO SOLUTIONS and NO NEW IDEAS except tax cuts for every problem, even when it drops federal revenue below the equalization point and just adds to the deficit.

Come on karl....what's your solution to the $106 Trillion in unfunded future liabilities that you will be paying forever?

I also see that Newsweek has predicted that your popular mayor in houston (not the openly gay one that just got elected) will defeat your ultra-conservative teabagger perry in a close race for governor.
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 18, 2009 10:49 AM EST
by Kc98GT:
"The point is that we all will be paying for this for years and years. Someone with common sense has to step up and ramp back spending."
-------------------





Still waiting............come on karl.....cut something!

Ok karl, so what in your infinite wisdom would you tell your texass congresscritters to cut as far as spending?

You want to cut your relatives Social Security and Medicare, or do you want to cut funding to the military/industrial complex that has grown entirely too large and too expensive?

Do you want to cut unemployment benefits for those that are struggling?

Do you want to cut the high cost of our out-of-hand criminal justice system and prisons that give prisoners free food and health care?

Do you want to cut infrastructure spending like the GOP has for years?

Come on karl.....step up to the plate in houston, and cut something!
Reply to this comment
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 7:35 PM EST
Man someone got a little riled up; i'm flattered. Gov. Perry pointed out, ?In light of the economic downturn affecting the nation, this session we continued to make wise choices, such as cutting taxes on 40,000 small businesses and maintaining a multi-billion dollar balance in our Rainy Day Fund that have helped our state sustain its overall economic strength. Luckily for me, my representatives know about the risk of running up out of control budgets, and we currently have a surplus in case we fail to make ends meet. My state, and my family have balanced our budgets, the government should make it a goal to do the same; just as Clinton did.

Many years from now when I am ready to retire, I will not have Social Security or Medicare to depend on. Nope, there will be me and my 401k and whatever other investments and income I may have. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, even though I will be paying for something my whole life that I will never receive the benefits from.

I'm curious as how this President's actions so far have improved our economic stability, and not worsened it? Unemployment rose every month this year; yet he waits until November to create a jobs bill! Unfortunately this President's agenda is not about what' best for the people; it's how can I control them.
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 18, 2009 10:58 AM EST
Actually, when I was your age I never thought SS would be there for me from all the raiding of the trust funds since 1969 for WARS and such!

Why do all conservatives use their best "ronnie the rat" raygun red herring of "government is bad, and is the problem," while never being able to admit that the trust funds like SS and especially Medicare with costs increasing several times the inflation rate today, have been raided since 1969 for other expenditures like WARS and such?

You can now use 20/20 hindsight and bash the bushies all you want, but it was the "conservative" GOP-led congresscritters that twisted so many arms in 2003 to get their BIG PHARMA payoff -- Medicare Part D -- passed with nothing but RED INK forever, $18 Trillion in UNFUNDED FUTURE LIABILITIES!
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 5:22 PM EST
by Kc98GT:
Your spot on about the unfunded liabilities, this link shows live figures and included the unfunded liabilities; no clue on the accuracy though. http://www.usdebtclock.org/
--------------------------------------




Yes, and your link shows a whopping $106 Trillion in unfunded future liabilities including:

$74 Trillion in unfunded Medicare liability
$18 Trillion in unfunded prescription drug liability (2003 by GOP)
$14 Trillion in unfunded Social Security liability

So with fewer youngsters like yourself to pay for the retirees on Social Security, Medicare and pharmaceutical drugs, what's your plan to solve the major problem of the $106 Trillion in unfunded future liabilities?

BTW, all those above programs were in place well before Obama, so you cannot blame him for the $106 Trillion in unfunded future liabilites, but we can certainly blame the GOP-led congresscritters and bush for the 2003 Medicare Part D gift to BIG PHARMA! You'll be paying for years and years and years to come! Good luck, karl.
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 5:51 PM EST
Still waiting to hear from the peanut gallery, as to what should be done about the $106 Trillion in unfunded future liabilities, mainly from Medicare and Social Security, which makes the current $12 Trillion national debt look very small.

Medicare Part D passed by the GOP-congresscritters in 2003, had no way to pay for all those expensive pharmaceuticals for seniors that require so many of them, and just yesterday, ALL the GOP senators voted against the 2 amendments in the health care reform bill that would have allowed for competition through pharmaceutical imports from Canada!

Why does the GOP want health care and pharmaceuticals to bankrupt America?
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 6:11 PM EST
Notice how all of these are entitlement programs that the progressives pushed for, and eventually made law. I think the idea is great, retirement helped by SS; health care covered once you become elderly as in medicare. Unfortunately all of these massive entitlement programs were not run well by the government. So you believe the answer is to expand government further, and give it more power? I'd love to hear your reasoning on why that is the correct course. If this happened in the public sector, then the Government would be no more because it would be bankrupt. Luckily other countries in the world have faith in us and let us borrow; because we always have been, and always will be the greatest country on earth!

The only thing you can blame Obama on is what has been passed and brought up by his congress thus far. A stimulus package that expanded government and increased their salaries as everyone else loses jobs and gets their pay cut.

The point is that we all will be paying for this for years and years. Someone with common sense has to step up and ramp back spending.
See all 4 Replies
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 2:26 PM EST
Typical liberal; they can only call people names and their arguments hardly hold water. NAFTA is a treaty between Canada, Mexico, and the United States that was designed to foster greater trade between the three countries. NAFTANAFTANAFTA has been in effect since 1 January 1994. Oh man I forgot who as President back in 1994, oh yeah CLINTON; idiot....

Plans were uncovered in Iraq that they wanted to pursue WMD's, this is fact. But as we all know, none were there or in the direct works. Cooked intelligence; I guess that similar to the cooked climate data eh.

Although i'm probably a kid compared to your age, but at least I don't act like one.
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 5:12 PM EST
WASHINGTON ? A report on unemployment claims and a forecast of U.S. economic activity pointed Thursday to an economy mending slowly, without the job growth needed to fuel a vigorous recovery.
------------------------




Come now karl, don't you 'think' that a few dollars spent right now on job growth to fuel a vigorous recovery, would be money well spent, or do you 'think' that unemployment benefits run forever? Then what?

BTW, even though Clinton did sign the eventual NAFTA bill, this was a GOP and poppy bush project for years, following-up the first 1988 agreement with Canada, and it just took longer and more arm twisting by corporate America to get it through Congress. Personally, I think it has been a disaster with corporate America the big winner for cheap labor, and consumers and the environment have been the big losers.

I'm willing to bet heavily, that people like you will be singing a different tune as you see our climate change for the worse in your lifetime, since you haven't seen much at 25, and you're just fooling yourself if you actually believe that there was "cooked climate data." Open your eyes, karl, and just see all the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE!

BTW, I see you like to call people names too.....HYPOCRITE!
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 2:08 PM EST
by Empire-George:
"I don't know why Liberals are so clueless and want to continue to raise taxes higher and higher and then wonder why the economy isn't improving."
-------------------------------






Maybe you're living in a fantasyland all of your own making, completely divorced from reality, since the country I live in today has not raised any taxes since bushworld, and most workers have even seen more money in each paycheck this year due to the stimulus bill. I think you're just FEARmongering and parroting the usual glenn beck conspiracy theories that you get with your GOP Kool-aid.

When did YOUR taxes go up this year? Mine did NOT!
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 1:52 PM EST
by Kc98GT:
"Obama has spent an unprecedented amount, and is on pace to easily outspend Bush, so who is the hypocrit?"
------------------------------------






Apparently your Economics 101 class didn't relate to you that not only do we have a current $12 Trillion national debt, of which $5.6 Trillion is due to the bushevik's endless WARmongering, tax cuts for the wealthiest and Medicare Part D amongst other spending projects, but we have a $40 Trillion UNFUNDED FUTURE LIABILITY mainly due to Medicare and Social Security and the 80 million baby boomers getting ready to retire over the next 2 decades.

You republiCONS calling yourselves young "Independents," are just kidding yourselves if you 'think' that the bush/cheney Great Recession is just like every other economic downturn we've had post WWII.

The same "tricks" used in the past will not work now, (BTW, one of those was lowering the interest rate, but GEEZ, that has already been at rock bottom for over a year), and this recovery will be extremely long, painful and change America forever, including the way we do business in a global economy competition. The problem there is that the U.S. already has a huge burden of being the only industrialized country without universal health care, so until that albatross is fixed, which doesn't look likely anytime soon, our debt will continue to soar no matter which party is in control and who's the president!
Reply to this comment
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 2:12 PM EST
Your spot on about the unfunded liabilities, this link shows live figures and included the unfunded liabilities; no clue on the accuracy though. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

I guess you read part of my posts, but choose to ignore the rest. I couldn't agree with you more regarding the taxes. I believe the middle class and poor are the only that should receive cuts, but I do not believe in raising the wealthy tax bracket by much, if any. So, what your saying is that the entitlement programs (which are great ideas by the way) have unfunded liabilities which we cannot afford to pay for? Then why on earth do you believe that another entitlement program will somehow fix all that is wrong?

Please, point out in the Constitution where the government has to mandate that all citizens have to purchase health insurance, or anything else for that matter. If it's not in there, OUR government CAN'T do it to US.
by briannorwood December 17, 2009 1:34 PM EST
Just a reminder to all the boys and girls out there...

You'd better be good or Richard Cheney will come into your room at night and steal all your stuff!
Reply to this comment
by lakota2012 December 17, 2009 1:29 PM EST
by Kc98GT:
"I'm an Independent as we speak because of what Bush did, but I will never vote Democrat."
------------------------------------




by Empire-George:
"Truly an excellent comment....as a conservative Republican, I commend you for spelling it out, from an independent point of view..."
----------------------------------








HA!...HA!...HA!.......ROTFLMFAO!!!

You BOTH are dyed-in-the-wool republiCONS, since calling yourselves either "Independents" or "conservatives" means absolutely nothing, and being a "born again" fiscal conservative like the miNOrity party of NO is trying to paint themselves today through obstructionism, means absolutely nothing as history has proven to us.

Our government is severely broken and has been for decades, and until we wrestle control back from the corporatocracy to WE THE PEOPLE, nothing will change from the oligarchic plutocracy we have.
Reply to this comment
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 1:42 PM EST
Yeah i've seen both sides of the aisle. Your left side has no valid arguments; we blame Bush for where we are, and our Trillion dollar spending bills will SAVE US! Last time I checked free Americans created the government and what role it shall play in America....oh yeah the CONSTITUTION. It is, never was, and never should be the other way around. WE put the government in place to 'oversee' us, not to run our lives. If you want a more expanded government role then please feel free to leave our country. I think Europe is looking for anyone they can find who is willing to pay their extremely high taxes! God Bless America and it's founders.
by Empire-George- December 17, 2009 12:45 PM EST
by Kc98GT December 17, 2009 11:48 AM EST
Sorry element51, but Republicans are not invited to the same table as Liberals and their President. We as a country see the result of reckless spending from Bush AND Obama. What do Americans do when they rake up unsustainable debt? I can guarantee you if they continue to spend the same way, then they go BANKRUPT. Liberals use Bush as an excuse, "Well, Bush spend recklessly, so we can to!" I'm an Independent as we speak because of what Bush did, but I will never vote Democrat.

Obama has spent an unprecedented amount, and is on pace to easily outspend Bush, so who is the hypocrit? "We have to spend our way out of this recession!" You end a recession by creating jobs and hiring. You do this by doing what Reagan did. You cut payroll taxes and you don't scare employers that they HAVE to buy insurance in the future.

It's quite scary that liberals have no problem with the President pursuing nothing but Health Care this entire year. I guess with the Stimulus passed they just knew the jobs were taken care of, so we could move on to other issues. And here we are....2010 around the corner.

_________________

Truly an excellent comment....as a conservative Republican, I commend you for spelling it out, from an independent point of view...This year, it is obvious which party is the out-of-control spenders (Dem), and which is trying their best to have the government exercise fiscal restraint (Rep)
Reply to this comment
See all 79 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook