Dems: Congress Could Back Stimulus Plan Up To $700 Billion (VIDEO)

UPDATE: President-elect Obama urged swift passage by Congress of a massive two-year spending and tax-cutting recovery program which significantly exceeds the plan he discussed during the campaign.

The Associated Press reports:

Though Obama aides declined to discuss a total cost, it probably would far exceed the $175 billion he proposed during the campaign, but would not immediately seek to raise taxes on the rich. Some economists and lawmakers have argued for a two-year plan as large as $700 billion, equal to the Wall Street bailout Congress approved last month...

The scope of the recovery package is far more ambitious than what Obama had spelled out during his presidential campaign, when he proposed $175 billion of spending and tax-cutting stimulus. The new one will be significantly larger and would incorporate his campaign ideas for new jobs in environmentally friendly technologies -- the "green economy." It also would include his proposals for tax relief for middle- and lower-income workers.

Senior Democrats hinted today that Congress could get behind a massive stimulus plan worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

Nancy Pelosi on Face the Nation:

In a recorded interview with CBS' "Face the Nation" that was aired on Sunday, Pelosi, a California Democrat, said the package should be aimed at creating jobs immediately and include investments for future growth. Pelosi said several economists have called for a package in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

When asked if that would be the case for the stimulus package lawmakers are contemplating, Pelosi said: "It could be, if it also contained a tax cut. Something of several hundred billion would have to be some investment into the future, plus creating jobs immediately, and a tax cut."

Chuck Schumer on This Week:

In an interview with ABC's This Week, Schumer said, "I believe we need a pretty big package here," Schumer said, adding that Congress is working on getting the economic package to president elect Barack Obama by inauguration day. "I think it has to be deep. In my view, it has to be between $500 and $700 billion dollars and that's because our economy is in serious, serious trouble."

"It's a little like having a new New Deal, but you have to do it before the Depression. Not after," Schumer added.

Comments

[BreakfastatTiffanys1]

Obama is getting foreign policy advice from Scowcroft.

I wonder why he hasn't sought Gov. Palin's advisement on energy?

McCain says no one in the entire US of A knows more than Sarah on energy.

No one.

[BlueStateMan]

Scowcroft was one of the FIRST to warn against invading Iraq.

What's your point?

[BreakfastatTiffanys1]

Yikes!

[Carolab]

And Scowcroft and Baker presented the option that junior ignored.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2006/11/16/baker_rescue/index.html

[BWonka]

And McCain knows best - why, he even had Obama right where he wanted him.

[BreakfastatTiffanys1]

You betcha.

McCain said Palin was an energy genius, so why hasn't O sought her advisement?

McCain nominated the dumbest girl in the world as his VP.

[liseworks]

Suggestion for PARDON Amendment :

It can only be done 'up to' 2 years before leaving office ?

Any such attempted action should be willing to suffer the repercussions / accountability -

[JettaBostonian]

How about only for convictions and not for a member of the administration of the President issuing the pardon?

A time limit wouldn't be of any real use.

[liseworks]

Yep - works for me - but how CAN WE STOP IT NOW ??? Really.

[Bullwinkie]

No conflict of interests. As tight as the bar

[BlueStateMan]

Can an Amendment NEGATE something described in one of the original Articles?

Would we need to call another Constitutional Convention to do that?

[Carolab]

You have to name the offense and the person who committed it.

[crease]

Stimulate the economy from the bottom up is the only way to really help this country get moving.Giv­e us the money so we can spend it on our economy for cars,tv`s, washers and dryers and such,the rich and powerful don`t and will not ever have a handle on money because of their GREED.Give it to us and see what we can do with it, I say.

[georgebeckton]

That is the ONLY way out.

[whatsthatsound]

There is no "it". It's money that doesn't really exist. They only "make" it for themselves. They're not going to make it for the rest of us.

[Peter007]

Maybe we should get rid of the phase " Stimulate the economy". I'm not sure its a good economic idea. Its like " Jump Start" the economy. I think its something politicians say when things aren't going well. We had a stimulus package this past spring and it didn't seem to work. The new package will be directed at State Governments and their need to balance their budgets. Somebody tell me how more money in the state coffers is going to help me pay my mortgage bill next Spring.?

[Bullwinkie]

buying tv's made in china is going to stimulate the wrong economy. We need to create jobs in this country. Green energy and infrastructure may work, but the same old crap we bought last year will not help.

[Big0725]

It will if you throw a tariff on that TV that was mad in China. If that TV has $100 worth of American labor in it but the Chinese labor cost $10, you drop a $90 tariff on each one o those TVs.

That's for starts.

[scottowego]

That is so right. The first stimulus package ( a check in the mail) went straight to Wallmart. The only thing I can find in Wallmart that's American made is Anchor Hocking glass. Everything else is from China. Guess where our stimulus checks went? Washington is a waste of time. They don't know what they're doing up there on the hill. I knew that stimulus check was a mistake and I'm just an average Joe. The other thing that sticks in my craw is the digital conversion of tv. Everybody's going out to buy new tvs. Guess where they're made? YIKES!

[maxdenn]

I just love the way some folks try to tell us that our economic pains are psychological.

[Bullwinkie]

I know it's driving me fing nutty

[RJII]

It's always well paid TV anchors or overpaid politicans sprewing cra p the loudest..

[maxdenn]

FDR is one of my two fave presidents. But I don't necessarily think that today fear is the only thing we have to fear, relative to the economy.

[BlueStateMan]

We can add ignorance to that equation, too.

[Big0725]

Fear is generally caused by ignorance.

Ignorance is a funny thing. It has enormous power but it can be defeated easily.

[Carolab]

AMEN. The Amurcan people just don't seem to know what's going on, and the media certainly are helping to keep them dumb.

[Tom95134]

Today we have to fear obstructionist Republicans.

[ccortezz]

We can't cut his tongue out but we can cease his money.

[amaycatbaker]

Big Business CEO's worship the feudal system.

They hated fair work, for fair pay, and they wanted to get rid of the Depression policies that regulated monopolies. The republicans helped, and got compensated, at least the ones in power.

A bail out will be another band-aid.

[Carolab]

All these guys have EVER wanted to do is UNDO everything FDR did for us.

[BlueStateMan]

Reagan even said it in THOSE words... verbatim.

[SCG]

Obama sees the bigger picture, that's why I supported him early on. Hearing Michelle was the closed the deal. He's the one I have confidence in, among all those who surround him.

[SCG]

^ (Hearing Michelle closed the deal.) botched revision sorry.

[maxdenn]

I would have to think the direction we are headed is toward an economic depression. And if that happens it will make "the Great Depression" seem like a trip to Disneyland.

[Big0725]

You think so?

I had two parents that went through the Great Depression. Mom was a teenager and dad was in his twenties. Mom had it fairly good because grandpa had a good job that never closed down. Dad, on the other hand, jumped a railroad train for 2 years looking for work. He picked fruit in California and Hawaii and finally wound up as a cop in Miami in 1932. From what I culled from their stories and what I see now, this one isn't going to have the legs of the Great Depression.

[BlueStateMan]

It could be worse as the entire WORLD is being engulfed in it.

The Great Depression of the 30s was as simpler one... where people could act as itinerant laborers..­. which even the migrant farms workers here & now are struggling with.

[scottowego]

Meanwhile the baby boomers are getting older and near retirement.

[myangeldog1]

The first depression also coincided with the dust bowl.

[4one]

my mortgage is past due , mycredit cards are late. Can I get a bail-out-Hell no its called
welfare for people like me.
I HATE REPUBLICANS AND THEIR HYPOCRITICAL BULL****

[liseworks]

One step at a time :
1) Relax - there is NOTHING to be gained by anger / nervousness.
2) If you can, work for a bit at an extra job (it's not forever) -
3) If you can men.tally prepare for the loss of your house, consider this : sometimes owning something is just an illusion - who cares if you own it "on paper" - (it helps put things in perspective to remember that many peoples' house is "under a bridge") -
4) If you want to earn 18% (or so) on your money, then GET RID of your CC's -

[Tom95134]

Actually, #4 is really at the top of the list. Yeas, you still have to pay them off but cut them up and if you need to use a card then get a debit card from your bank (without overdraft protection).

Regarding #2, there simply isn't many extra jobs out there. In some cases, it will cost you more to take a 2nd job that to just start to live frugally. i.e., cut out those extra shopping trips, watch for sales at the grocery store, start using a crockpot to fix meals with cheaper cuts of meat or go buy a pressure cooker. MY mother cooked with one in the 40's and 50's when you watched every penny you spent for food. Take sandwiches to work/school.

As to your house (#3) go to your lender and simply tell them they can either work with you or here's the keys. You would be surprised. THEY DON"T WANT YOUR HOUSE and they don't want it setting empty because it looses value very fast. Look for a minimal size apartment that meets you basic needs. Years ago I moved from a 2 bedroom 1200 sq.ft. apartment onto a 27' sailboat. You would be surprised at how quickly you figure out what you don't need.

[Chillinout]

Hey! You should listen to Lise, she's pretty smart about this stuff. She talked me through a pretty bad time.

[liseworks]

; )

[JettaBostonian]

Carolab
Turley said they can't give out pardons without an actual crime--you have to know what people are being pardoned from and you have to name who is being pardoned.
Posted 08:43 PM on 11/23/2008

"...Now, THEREFORE, I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.

"IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eighth day of September, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventy-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and ninety-nin­th."

GERALD R. FORD
http://www.ford.utexas.edu/LIBRARY/speeches/740061.htm

"...has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974."

Turley is wrong.

[JettaBostonian]

While naming the person receiving the pardon would be necessary, naming the crime is not.

Notice that Nixon was not pardoned for any specific crime.

[Carolab]

Right, but the point I think Turley was making is that it was never challenged, or tested and is therefore not a precedent.

[Carolab]

The cases you just cited assume an "offense".

[Carolab]

Just because everyone accepted it doesn't mean it was Constitutional--it wasn't challenged.

[JettaBostonian]

There is precedent through Supreme Court Rulings.

Ex Parte Garland. Supremes ruled that a pardon could be given at any time:

"Article II, section 2 of the Constitution authorizes the President "to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment" (the "Pardon Clause"). In Ex Parte Garland, the Supreme Court summarized the reach of a presidential pardon as follows:

A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence. If granted before conviction, it prevents . . . the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.

Garland, 71 U.S. at 380-81.

[JettaBostonian]

This broad interpretation of the effect of a pardon was affirmed in Knote v. United States, 95 U.S. 149 (1877), in which the court stated:

A pardon is an act of grace by which an offender is released from the consequences of his offense, so far as such release is practicable and within control of the pardoning power, or of officers under its direction. It releases the offender from all disabilities imposed by the offense, and restores to him all his civil rights. In contemplation of law, it so far blots out the offence, that afterwards it cannot be imputed to him to prevent the assertion of his legal rights.

[Chillinout]

I heard Turley on MSNBC and what he said is that he thinks if Bush tries to give out a blanket pardon without naming names, it will probably be challenged in court. He also said that academics have been debating whether that would be constitutional or not and they are split on it.

[BlueStateMan]

It'd be interesting to see what wold happen if that authority (PREEMPTIVE pardons) was ever challenged in court... the "Unitaries" no doubt would claim that it is an "inherent power" but most Constitutional scholars scoff at that idea.

Also, by using Depleted Uranium, an argument could be made that the crime being committed is ONGOING, therefore it could be described as "yet to be committed"­.... which is NOT covered in Ford's precedent.

[JettaBostonian]

The Supremes have already ruled:

Article II, section 2 of the Constitution authorizes the President "to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment" (the "Pardon Clause"). In Ex Parte Garland, the Supreme Court summarized the reach of a presidential pardon as follows:

A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence. If granted before conviction, it prevents . . . the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man, and gives him a new credit and capacity.

[ccortezz]

Tell your doctor if you are taking any other medications. The tube

[CBS]

NYT
"Federal regulators were considering a new rescue for Citigroup on Sunday, a step that could mark a third leg of the government’s broader efforts to bolster the nation’s financial industry, according to people briefed on the plan.

Under the proposal, the government would shoulder losses at Citigroup if those losses exceeded certain levels, according to these people, who spoke on the condition that they not be identified because the plan was still under discussion.

If the government should have to take on the bigger losses, it would receive a stake in Citigroup. The banking giant has been brought to its knees by gaping losses on mortgage-related investments. "

[georgebeckton]

This whole thing doesn't have legs, or at the very least it's tripping over them.

Oh God, Enron was far simpler than this i'm getting all nostalgic

[CBS]

I know....is­n't it amazing...­the good old bad days are nothing compared to this.

[MetalCanuck]

These guys are insane?? LOL We are heading to hyperinflation very soon. Where are they going to get this money? We need deflation for people to be able to afford things again.

[Rep0X]

A new w.a.r is planned...

[SmellyOne]

The housing market is deflating. The stock market is deflating. Deflation is already here.

[Carolab]

Yes, it is.

[Carolab]

Deflation is what caused the Great Depression, and we are heading there, actually.

[Chillinout]

Yep, prices for food and gas are dropping like a rock. I don't think this is going to get that bad though.

[SCG]

I'd say it was a result of the depression.

[BlueStateMan]

I'm seeing more of a hyper-infl­ation... as Germany suffered in the 1930's (a million bucks for a loaf of bread, etc)...

Once OPEC cuts production (which they have promised to do)... gas prices will skyrocket &... OFF WE GO!

[williamg]

Projection: Franken to Win Recount by 27 Votes

--Nate Silver, Fivethirtyeight.com

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/projection-franken-to-win-recount-by-27.html

[liseworks]

A
W
E
S
O
M
E
!
!

[KO4Pres]

What Lise said!! :)

[Chillinout]

YES! One more to go and we got the sixty!

[canucklivinginUSA]

BOOSH and the GOP douches better accept that stimulus package or I will personally cut their gonads

[SCG]

They'll probably hold it hostage to some deal, tax cuts, Colombian trade deal. I think we'll have to wait until Jan 20th.

[georgebeckton]

I suspect you'll have to sew them back on first

[Carolab]

Call CONGRESS.