iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Pelosi: 'We'll Never Have Deficit Reduction Unless We Have Job Creation'

Pelosi

First Posted: 03/18/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 03:45 PM ET

The deficit debate in Washington misses the fundamental point, said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday, arguing that the primary objective for policy makers should be job creation -- without which, the deficit will explode as tax revenues collapse.

"What I've told the members is that we have a lot of good ideas [regarding job creation]. We have to prioritize them, get them out there and figure out how we will eventually pay for them, but not be bogged down in the next couple years by that," Pelosi said on a conference call with a handful of economic reporters and economists who blog.

"The debate between deficit reduction and job creation is not a real choice, because we'll never have deficit reduction unless we have job creation. Of course we have to be sensitive to how this is paid for, but that doesn't mean we don't do it."

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), who is often more hawkish on the deficit than Pelosi, spoke in similar terms in an interview with HuffPost last week, putting the Speaker and her top lieutenant on the same page.

"Obviously, the economy has to be regenerated before we can have any shot at getting the deficit under control, so you've got to get the economy moving first," he said.

Pelosi said that the House is considering a variety of plans, including extending unemployment insurance (UI), subsidized health benefits (COBRA), assistance to state and local governments, improving small businesses' access to credit, investing in green buildings and "targeted public service jobs."

Democrats are also considering a transaction tax on short-term trades on Wall Street, a measure being pushed by House Majority Whip James Clyburn. "We have seen a great deal of anger from the public about the fact that once again we see Wall Street nationalizing the risk and privatizing the gain," said Pelosi. "The downside is always felt by the worker and the upside is always realized by those who never seem to take a loss no matter what happens."

Aid to states is complicated by the fact that some GOP governors squirrel the money away in the hope of cutting taxes -- or reject assistance outright. Economist James Galbraith suggested on the call that as a condition of accepting the aid, the states agree to keep their tax structure constant. "I think we probably will go down that route. I think we have to. Dave Obey thinks we have to and he's writing the bill for us," Pelosi said, referring to the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Centrist political pundits, House Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats and -- on Monday's front page -- the New York Times, have all raised alarms about the growing deficit. Hoyer told HuffPost that he is actively working with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to institute "statutory pay-as-you-go" (PAYGO) -- a law that would require all congressional spending to be offset by revenue increases or spending cuts elsewhere. That statute would contain emergency exemptions that allow for present spending on jobs to increase, said Hoyer.

For Pelosi, the pundits are wrong. People would rather have a job than a smaller deficit, she emphasized.

The focus on the deficit is also fraught with economic miscalculations. Long-term interest rates are extremely low, despite the hysteria, and the U.S. government is well positioned to meet its obligations indefinitely. The Chinese government, meanwhile, which holds a pile of U.S. debt, has little recourse other than to continue to buy U.S. bonds.

The Nation's DC editor Chris Hayes put it succinctly, using an old saying, in a recent column: "'When you owe $100,000, the bank owns you. When you owe $100 million, you own the bank' -- and it aptly describes the US relationship with China, which holds approximately 70 percent of its 2.3 trillion foreign reserves in dollars."

Conservatives have been pushing for PAYGO for so long that it could entice them to get on board to help the economy recover. Hoyer said that instituting statutory PAYGO could be a political trade-off for short-term spending on jobs. In other words, the message to Blue Dogs and the Senate would be: help us fix the economy now and we'll give you the budget remedy you've wanted.

"Yeah," said Hoyer, when asked if PAYGO could be a bargaining chip tossed to conservative Democrats. "I think from a conservative standpoint, they correctly believe that you've got to impose fiscal discipline and so I think you're right, this is an incentive for them. And it ought to be an incentive for others, as well, to adopt statutory PAYGO so that we can have the votes for short-term stimulus and help at a time when that's needed."

Hoyer said that President Obama, at a recent White House meeting, said that he wanted PAYGO instituted "as quickly as possible" and "endorsed it strongly."

"He's for it, he's working for it and understands that we're going to include it [in a legislative package headed for the Senate], and he's for that," said Hoyer. "But I think he, like I do, feels that you cannot depress the economy at the same time you're trying to stimulate the economy. That's counterproductive."

Pelosi noted that she, too, is a longtime supporter of PAYGO and that one of her top lieutenants, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), first proposed it in 1982.

"I don't consider myself a conservative," said Hoyer. "But I do consider myself somebody who believes that we've got to get the finances long-term of the country under control if our kids and grandchildren are going to have the ability to fund their priorities at their time. Obviously, the economy has to be regenerated before we can have any shot at getting the deficit under control, so you've got to get the economy moving first. It's the chicken and the egg, I suppose, in some ways, but you've got to have the economy moving before you have any shot at getting fiscal balance."

Pelosi recalled that deficit hawks won a short-lived victory in 1937 when they persuaded FDR to roll back spending, but all it did was turn the recovery back around. "If we pull our punch, as they did in the mid-30's, we shouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself," she said.


Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

The deficit debate in Washington misses the fundamental point, said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday, arguing that the primary objective for policy makers should be job creation -- wit...
The deficit debate in Washington misses the fundamental point, said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday, arguing that the primary objective for policy makers should be job creation -- wit...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,066
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (17 total)
11:14 PM on 01/02/2010
The Democrats have had control of Congress since 2007...
We have been sledding downhill even worse since then.

About time to quit talking and get some action going.
What happened to all the green energy jobs that were supposed to put
all these people back to work.

Let's be honest.....most of the people who are laid off will not go back to
their jobs because those jobs have left the building...
America, what used to be America is no more. The factory jobs are
gone to faraway lands.... The tech jobs are the same and the
ones that haven't been outsourced are importing workers from
faraway lands.....So...goodbye America, it was sure nice to know you.
09:32 PM on 11/28/2009
She doesn't care about the deficit.....she has money,and she wants more...if not all....Pelosi has stolen money her whole elite life.....Liberal policy=....steal 20% from the rich (who don't agree with you)....give 10% to the poor.....make the middle class pay the rich back.....then take 20% from the poor.....WAKE UP AMERICA....................................look at ANT Democrat district....poverty
DontJustFollow
Ask not what your country can do for you...
06:38 PM on 11/28/2009
sounds like trickle down to me - someone must have given Speaker Pelosi a Ronald Reagan audio book to listen to on her last flight to San Francisco - - -
09:35 PM on 11/28/2009
read a economics book....there is no such thing as trickle down....Liberals gave this name to supply side economics(letting the people create wealth).....Liberals like keynesian economics (borrowing,and printing money to create wealth for themselves)
photo
Littlewords
I think I am, therefore I am, I think?!?
02:44 PM on 11/28/2009
Awaiting the right to come railing back that all this is solved with a new round of always failing trickle down economics and tax cuts.
photo
Littlewords
I think I am, therefore I am, I think?!?
02:35 PM on 11/28/2009
It's been entertaining watching the Righties both misunderstand and incorrectly characterize Pelosi as a light weight liberal and weak leader. Many never realized what she had to learn to win speaker role.

As a US rep for over 20 years, she has to represent and maintain support from one of the most diverse districts in the country. While she faced(es) limited Repub threat, her district's constituents represent a wide range of political positions from bleeding edge liberalism, fiscal conservatism, LGBT community issues, environmentalism, ethnic diversity, and a blend of local poverty and extreme wealth as well as business sectors including finance, tourism, and transportation. Her district is complex and fickle with in your face outcry when displeased.

California politics is not for the faint of hear. The Governator learned the hard way that California plays political hard ball, humbling the strongest politicians. This is backyard to tough leaders like Ronald Reagan, Pat Brown, Richard Nixon, Willie Brown, Earl Warren and contemporary peers Diane Feinstein, Jerry Brown, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Barbara Boxer. California recalls leaders for FAR less than the remiss Gov Sanford or convicted ex-Rep Jefferson.

Pelosi is no light weight nor simple liberal, leading during tough times of economic calamity and multiple wars while fighting the toughest partisan behavior seen in generations. Recently, she mixed it up with the CIA ending in a CIA black eye.

I think the Righties now see Pelosi as a politically savvy, formidable, and at times fierce leader with a mandate to drive.
DontJustFollow
Ask not what your country can do for you...
06:42 PM on 11/28/2009
not to mention a lot of very dedicated fund raisers that Pelosi has made extremely wealthy with her programs and give-a-ways . . .

she would not be where she is today without President Clinton giving her the power to slice and dice the Presidio up for her developer and investment friends . . .
10:50 AM on 11/28/2009
RIGHT ON Speaker Polosi
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Nordean Baxter
07:38 PM on 11/27/2009
Peloshi is right. Forget the debt right now and put people back to work/. We have seen what the trinle -down theory is all about. It only make the rich richer. They have had massive tax beak and where are the jobs and why did the debt under Bush increrase by the billions daily. Borrow and make jobs. The economy is getting better for a lot of people but we only hear the Republican side of the story. Keep on pushung "Nancy."
10:49 PM on 11/28/2009
In Boulder City, NV, the gov't paid out $1,000,000 to create.....2 jobs...

Way to build an economy.
11:37 AM on 11/27/2009
Correct.

The Conservatives have been using the same tactic forever: bankrupt the democracy when in power to make sure the liberals don't have the money to do anything in their terms.

There is plenty of money and production in the world, it's just clotted in the top .1% banksters.

Tax the rich.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:23 PM on 11/27/2009
The national debt has increased in most years since 1942, regardless of the party in power in congress.
05:22 PM on 11/27/2009
No., It's gone down since WWII till raygun, bush and bush. It went down with Clinton too.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
09:02 PM on 11/27/2009
debt has gone down or level except for raygun bush and bush, no matter how you measure it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
10:42 PM on 11/26/2009
The time to worry about the deficit is now. But the deficit to worry about isn't this year's deficit. We should run a substantial deficit during recessions, but when the long-run picture shows a deficit we should fix it even if there's a recession when we get the chance.
06:08 PM on 11/27/2009
Makes no sense. Long term debt is a fiction, a projection.

Investment in Main Street will pay back many times. always has.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:52 PM on 11/27/2009
Past performance is not indicative of future results.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:05 PM on 11/26/2009
Pelosi is wrong. You have to worry about deficits now and take action now because the Chinese are becoming worried. That's a fact aof life. We are now indebted to the Red Chinese.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
pantherburns
labor creates all wealth
02:50 AM on 11/26/2009
Who woulda thunk the mere mention of Ch*ney would generate so much controversy?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
pantherburns
labor creates all wealth
02:43 AM on 11/26/2009
Those of you on the right that have a problem with this need to remember that your hero Dick Cheney, who in the past said that deficits don't matter, pushed for the only thing that the republicans accomplished while in office, and that was tax cuts for the rich.
09:07 PM on 11/26/2009
I believe that it was Rahm that said deficits don't matter. He also said, don't waste a good crisis.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
02:08 AM on 11/27/2009
Reagan Policies Gave Green Light to Red Ink

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 9, 2004; Page A11

The line is not likely to make this week's eulogies to Ronald Reagan, but when Vice President Cheney allegedly declared, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter," he summed up an enduring argument from the former president's economic legacy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
10:45 PM on 11/26/2009
The only thing the Republicans accomplished? Not by a long shot. They also raised spending to unprecedented levels, entrenched a set of lunatic-fringe right-wingers as a majority on the Supreme Court, gutted a lot of regulations, got us into two wars with no exit strategy, and crashed the economy.
12:20 AM on 11/26/2009
what a piece of work
11:23 PM on 11/25/2009
Pelosi: Worry About Deficit Later
Sure, only at your peril.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jinxed
starting over at 60
03:30 PM on 11/26/2009
I suggest you do some research into the Great Depression history and how "deficit reduction policies" erased gains made in turning around the economy in the mid '30s. If taxes are cut now, how are we ever going to dig our way out of the mess left us by the neo-cons and the disasterous policies of the Bush administration?

When it comes right down to it, eventually taxes must rise if we ever hope to reduce the deficit. But doing that right now when the economy is struggling would also be a disaster waiting to happen. We must have job creation and economy recovery first, then we can address the deficit.

I find it interesting and depressing that the neo-cons have no problem funding wars and sending ALL of our taxpayer money overseas while cutting all spending that would actually help America and her citizens. Why does America always come last with these people? If you have an emergency on an airliner and the oxygen masks drop down, it is REQUIRED that you put your own on first THEN help others. Why is this concept so hard for neo-cons to grasp?
09:31 PM on 11/26/2009
Just curious, why do we never consider reducing spending. If we continually raise taxes, where does that end. Politicians will always have ways to spend OUR money. What is the tax rate that will be enough, 40, 50, 80 99%? When will you see that?
07:03 AM on 11/27/2009
The 1930’s economy did not run on foreign oil, the larger the national debt grows,
the dollar gets weaker, the cost of oil goes up.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mark Kraft
02:13 PM on 11/25/2009
She's got a good point.

When the economy went into recession, not only did 10% of those with jobs lose them... lots of others had their salaries reduced, and everyone started spending half as much.

The simple fact is, the federal budget was already strained before the recession. Now, it's got a big, leaking gut wound and is bleeding out.

The quickest way through this mess is to put people back to work on improving our infrastructure, which will also put money in the hands of people who will spend it, while increasing efficiency, services, and reducing costs. We need a better national power grid.

There's also no good reason other than a failure of the competitive marketplace as to why broadband speeds in the US lag many years behind Japan and Korea, who pay about a quarter what we do in the US for ten times more bandwidth. We have the world's most powerful media and internet companies, and yet they can't roll out services because the connectivity that people have in their homes isn't adequate to support it. Similarly, businesses cannot support telecommuting, because the infrastructure for it isn't really in place.

Thing is, the unemployed are *already* getting government money. We need to have the government offer all of them a job at a reasonable wage and get them doing something worthwhile with their time and energy, rather than just being a drag on the economy.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jmpurser
See My micro-bio
10:14 PM on 11/25/2009
Agreed. I'll never forgive Nancy "Impeachment is off the table" Pelosi but here she's simply making good economic sense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jinxed
starting over at 60
03:34 PM on 11/26/2009
IMHO that's the biggest problem, good economic sense is not in the neo-cons concept.