Obama Undermines Jobs Mandate For the Sake of Bipartisanship

The stimulus package is consistently being attacked because not enough Republicans support it.  The fact that the bill received no Republican votes in the House, and "only" three Republicans support the Senate version, is sufficient to conclude that it fails Obama's objective of being "bipartisan."

We'll overlook for the moment that two years ago, any bill Joe Lieberman voted for was considered "bipartisan."    When Obama sketched out the goals for the stimulus package in early January, he started negotiating with himself by offering "huge tax cuts" as "a way to defuse conservative criticism and enlist Republican support." 

But the biggest ground he gave up to the Republicans was control of the primary objective he set for the bill, that it have "bipartisan" support.  As one veteran DC political observer notes: 

Rule one is that you never empower your opponents to control your victory, and once Obama said "80 votes" or "bipartisan" was the goal, he gave the Republicans the sole ability to determine success or failure -- because the Republicans are the only ones who can determine whether something is going to be "bipartisan" or not.  He put a gun in the hand of every Republican who wanted to take a shot at the bill, and they're firing away.

Roosevelt had the New Deal, Kennedy had the New Frontier, Johnson had the Great Society, Newt Gingrich had the Contract With America, and Obama has...the stimulus plan.  An abstract goal with fungible components that valued process above all else.  

Americans want jobs, and had the White House team in charge of presenting the bill to the public defined it as a "put America to work" bill and set a standard for measuring bipartisanship -- i.e., how successfully each side worked toward creating jobs  -- Republicans who cried that their ideas weren't being respected would have been forced to explain how those ideas met that goal.  

We could have all laughed together at John Kyl's ridiculous assertion that "nobody thinks tax cuts are going to do it all" when that's expressly what the Republican House plan did.  We could have laughed even harder as economists ripped apart the claim that tax cuts alone would create 6 million jobs and it would have provided the opportunity to expose the fundamental flaw in the GOP's belief that tax cuts are the answer to any question.   Instead, we're all focusing on the fact that John Cornyn isn't happy, because the message that came out of the White House is that he needs to be.

The administration assumed that Obama's overwhelming popularity, combined with a rapidly worsening economic crisis and a welcome mat for the GOP would be enough to push Republicans into a collaborative mode.   It wasn't.  They belatedly began calling the act the Economic Recovery Act, but it never caught on.  The  White House hailed the Nelson/Collins compromise because it creates "jobs jobs jobs," yet Paul Krugman and others maintain that the changes they made significantly reduced job creation, with estimates ranging between 600,000 and 1.25 million jobs over the next two years.   When Larry Summers was confronted with that charge on This Week with George Stephanopoulos he would not dispute it.  Apologists like Claire McCaskill are left to tilt at straw men.

When you factor in a 2:1 advantage for the Republicans in terms of TV face time, it's clear that they already have a leg up in controlling the terms of this debate.  The media is not pressing them about GOP governors unhappy about the aid to states that Susan Collins just hacked out of the bill, or pointing out that Senate Republicans who say this bill is "just too big" had no problem voting for George Bush's $1.35 trillion in tax cuts in 2001.  They didn't need to be told that the ultimate good was to make John Cornyn happy, especially when John Cornyn  has a vested interest in being unhappy.

If this becomes the template for all future sausage making between the White House and the Hill, progressive interests will continue to be offered up in sacrifice every time the Republicans decide they don't like something so the administration can appear to "rise above it all."  And rather than being forced to defend their propositions, dithering "centrists" will continue to be patted on the head for pitching public temper tantrums, holding the Senate hostage and parading before the cameras like a bunch of peacocks until their egos are suitably stroked.

There is no inherent value in bipartisanship, it's the means to an end.  If the administration doesn't define what that "end" is and gives the Republicans the power to determine success or failure by a simple refusal to participate, they will continue to do so.

Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake.com

Comments

[Emerald1943]

I sincerely hope President Obama has learned from this. He had not been in Washington very long prior to the election, and I think he was unprepared for the viciousness of the Republican opposition against him. While some in the republican party may have legitimate ideological differences over the stimulus bill, it is blatently apparent that some members of Congress are playing politics in the worst possible way....at the expense of the American worker who is losing his job, his home, his savings, and his dreams.

The ecomonic situation in this country is entirely too grim for this game-playing. The idea of bipartisanship is nice, but there's not much demand for "nice" right now! We need jobs out here, and we need them NOW!

[ageless]

Lower the corporate tax rate to 15-20% to immediately increase US companies international competitiveness, encourage them to hire, enhance stock values, and, in turn, the valuations of millions of Americans" 401k and IRA accounts�.and, in turn, their confidence about the future and then their willingness to spend.

You really don't want that. They will only continue as they are now, and not one job will come out if it in the USA. A better idea would be tp tax the H3LL out of any American company with factories in other countries. Then watch the jobs return.

[sambolicioussssss]

I have a simple question. If as they say, WELLS FARGO is paying for its employees trips to Vegas as a reward for a job well done out of funds they classify as PROFITS, HOW CAN THEY POSSIBLY HAVE A LEGITIMATE NEED FOR A GOVERNMENT BAILOUT? If WELLS FARGO is actually turning a profit then the BOARD OF DIRECTORS should be arrested and charged with fraud for falsifying government documents. The printing of their full page ad recently claiming that these trips were funded by PROFITS is a DE FACTO ADMISSION OF GUILT to the charge of defrauding the government by applying for Federal Bailout money.

[dianhow]

So much of govt is ' smoke and mirrors' But- I believe that Obama is trying to change that. But it is a momentas task. Fard line GOP & their Fat cat CEO buddies- do not give a rats ass about the avergage tax payer. They are another breed altogether. We all need to be patient- this economy will take a time to improve enought to make folks notice. I'd say- a minimum of 18-24 months. . After all - it took Reagan / Bush policies years to unfold to this point. In the next 24 + months + be prepared for the GOP will do anything to RUIN OBama. They will spin-lie, mis inform- POWERFUL money people WANT THE POWER BACK- they've had it 20 of the last 28 years, many with a friendly congress. Never ever forget who and what got us here NEVER ! Obama has already made a great start Forget party loyality..loyality to country is all that matters !

[standard]

"There is no inherent value in bipartisanship, it's the means to an end. "

Now, really! Have you ENJOYED the past eight years of Republican unilateralism? Did you enjoy the Vietnam War era or tales of the Civil War? Of course not! Bipartisanship leads to a pattern of civility and a practice of compromise and co-operation. There's even a word for that: governing. We didn't elect Pres. Obama to dominate TV face time, we elected him to reunite a badly divided nation. If we give him room to do that in his chosen way, I think we'll all like the results in due course.

[Hallucinocynic]

Not exactly. The notion that 'governing' implies beneficent leadership is altogether wrong. There was consensus in Nazi Germany - for no other reason than it was fatal to object. Effective, successful leadership means recognizing a goal and taking the appropriate steps to accomplish that goal. If there are roadblocks - literally or figuratively - the leader will go around them...or through them.

The moment it becomes apparent that the other party means to compromise the goal - no matter what concessions have been offered - the effective leader will employ the appropriate means of dealing with them. There are times when the most Draconian measures should be employed.

As Shakespeare wrote, "The play's the thing." In this case, the economy is the thing and risking failure simply to assuage an unassuageable adversary is, at its root, self-defeating.

[Badger84]

Generally, I agree but Nazi Germany isn't a good test example of a representative democracy for your theory. IMO, the hard numbers are that Democrats (no thanks to Ben Nelson) didn't have the 60 votes needed to pass the bill they want. It is not unreasonable to hold your nose and get the best bill possible because there are people who are trying to figure out where they are going to live next week. Then, turn your attention and heat to the Rs' running for reelection in 2010 and those vacating seats:

* Richard Shelby of Alabama
* Lisa Murkowski of Alaska
* John McCain of Arizona
* Mel Martinez of Florida -- retiring
* Johnny Isakson of Georgia
* Mike Crapo of Idaho
* Chuck Grassley of Iowa -- ?
* Sam Brownback of Kansas -- retiring
* Jim Bunning of Kentucky
* David Vitter of Louisiana--bullseye
* Kit Bond of Missouri -- will not run
* Judd Gregg of New Hampshire
* Richard Burr of North Carolina
* George Voinovich of Ohio -- will not run
* Tom Coburn of Oklahoma -- ?
* Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania -- ?
* Jim DeMint of South Carolina
* John Thune of South Dakota
* Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas -- may retire to run for Gov.
* Bob Bennett of Utah

[standard]

You make an articulate case. In fairness, however, I'm addressing the U.S. today, not Germany eighty years ago. Obama hasn't lost control of the streets, his Presidency is less than a month old, and he has several years to make mid-course corrections in his tactics. What's more, just because a given need wasn't addressed (or wasn't addressed adequately ) in the current bit of legislation doesn't mean that it can't be addressed (or won't be) in other legislation in the near future: We're still in the majority.

Ms. Hamsher didn't say that bipartisanship may be an unwise tactic at present, she condemned it categorically. My point is that embracing pure partisanship can lead--and has led--to poor governance, gridlocked government, and even literal civil war here. As for Weimar Germany: Its fall came about under conditions of extreme partisanship; let's not forget that.

If the Republicans refuse to look after the critical, immediate needs of the nation, a 60+ Democratic majority in the Senate becomes certain in less than two years and all need for Republican co-operation evaporates. Independen­ts--critic­al to Obama's victory--demand co-operation. We'll need their votes to achieve a filibuster-free Senate and so, have to keep them on board in the meantime.

[berrycooda]

In addition to previous comments,

Lower the cost of government....

To much money going out for over 400 retired congress people who
are getting lucrative pensions.

Also, why does Congress usually get a 7% raise every year.

Take away some of their perks. They only work part of the year and get approx. $180.000 + speaking money etc.

[berrycooda]

Is this the only time the Congress has been accused of Partisanship....

Seems like it has been going on for a long time.

Anyway, why is it that the Dems want their way and if the Repubs.
want their way, it is all the Repubs. fault etc.

It takes 2 to Tango and it sounds like partisan politics on both sides.
It is up to the President to look over all the package and determine if
stuff in there is the usual pork...and remove it and get to work on how to implement what the stimulus calls for.

Some things in this pkg. don't belong there and should be reserved for another time. Such as millions for veterans from another country, and seed for the lawn in Washington. Money for the bee keepers.
New schools that each state is supposed to be responsible for.
We need better curriculum and teachers...not new schools.

This package should be gone over with a fine tooth comb and if it
isn't something that "stimulates" the economy, then get rid of it.

[dianhow]

Berry. here's the answer to your question. We've went with THE GOP WAY for 20 of the last 28 years. Reagan -Bush- Clinton- Bush again. Many of those years has a GOP friendly congress- THAT is what got us into this massive crisis ! What can't folks get that simple fact thru their heads> THe GOP way did NOT WORK. Reagan's deregulation- his trickle down economics, his insistance on UNFETTERED FREE TRADE- without rules to protect us all. THAT allowed this to happen. Banks have been free to do what they pleased. So they made 'bad loans ' - Then they packaged the loans as ' mortgage securities ' and UNLOADED them on Wall ST at a huge profit. So the risk was transferred to Wall ST. SO when the loans were foreclosed on- the banks sold them cheaply. That lowered values in the area. It spread all over the country. The hard line GOP is calling this package ' PORK ' because they knew so many of you will fall for it ! REagan lowered the tax rate for the top 3 % from 80 % to 30 %- that re-distributed a massive amount of money to the wealthy. Bush said- I'm giving them another huge tax break- while giving the masses a few crumbs to keep them in line. Now THATS PORK !! The middle class never got a far shake. WE've been had- and don't even know it.

[Beca]

The Republicans had their way for 8 years and nearly destroyed the country! The proof of how a tax cut economic policy does not work to avert economic downturns, does not stop jobs from beoing lost, and does not create even one job is in these 8 years. However, despite the epic failure of their economic policies, they are now the minority in Congress, yet continue to want to be in control, call the shots and get what they want, without any compromise.
To think that not one Republican in the Congress voted for the passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act shows their total disregard and disconnect for the American people. And this bill had been in the works since last year, passed and was vetoed by Bush. When it was reintroduced, not one Republican voted for it.
Anything that will produce a job is necessary, even the re-seeding of the lawn in Washington, it will require landscapers to do that, meaning jobs! The proposal was not asking for new schools, it was calling for updating old schools, schools that are falling appart and are inadequate for a good learning environment. That will require jobs in the construction field.

[janvoght]

in the short time since January 20th, 2009, when the President took office. i realized that the other president, actually burned thru a surplus, and a budget that was closer to being balanced that in any in recent history, and in the two terms that we, the trusting citizens of the united states gave him he took us to a downward spiral of a trillion dollar deficit, , that continues to drain human, financial, and yes even emotional resources. so even tho he is no longer in office we still feel the painful reults in our losses.
even tho many doubted in the power of the inspiration of this new leader, we have seen evidence of the very REAL love that he has for the united states. for this man, I would like to give my prayers and thanks to both his mother and grandmother (i wish they were here on earth to share in the joy they have given us in barack) and also to his loving insightful wife michelle for allowing her husband to give what love he has to pull this country out of the deep corruption and greed that we were being driven to. my deepest respect to a man who is actually willing to take the energy he feels from the american people and unite that with his own love, and help to give back the hope that is needed for people to believe in their government. THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT!!! you are a Godsend.

[dianhow]

THank you. I only hope that folks open their eyes - and see how the average worker/ citizen has been taken advantage of since the Reagan / Bush policies went into effect. It happened over many years. I have no loyaity to any party- only to my country. Obama has done more in 3 weeks than Bush did in 8 yrs. Obama has put limits on lobbyists- he froze salaries of his staff- he made govt more open thru the freedom of info act.- he has instituted new rules to keep govt honest.- its a great start. Bush dumped a load of 'toxic garbage' on OBama's shoulders. I trust that Obama will do the very best he can-without the greed- deregulation- favoring of the wealthy- cowboy swagger-lack of curiousity & integrity- that we have seen with Bush & Cheney / Rumsfeld. Hell- Bush even ignored warnings about 9/11- read to him a month before it happened. Then he says he kept us safe ! BS

[billw8017]

Much is made of the first hundred days and other possible anniversaries. Barack Obama will need 1461 days to get to January 20th 2012. In the meanwhile he will be president of all Americans, even the republicans and various radicals who may delight in embarrassing him. Serious people understand this.

Aside from whatever biases different media empires may have, all simplify to the horse race and other simple competitions. They like to "see" a fight. Various spectators respond, cheering on their favorites, ripping others, urging more combativeness and color.

The congressional republicans have played to this and, therefore, are said to be winning the media "battle." They will soon return to visit with their constituents. They will discover a considerable majority support the stimulus program. What will they then do when they return? There is a possibility that they will criticize it for being too small. Their current opposition is not from principle but mere gamesmanship. They may reconsider the game.

[kamact]

Stimulus Package – Recommended Improvements

The key objective of the Stimulus Package is to create millions of jobs, which, in turn, will help restore consumer confidence and provide more money enabling them to enhance the transactional health of our economy.

With this objective in mind, I recommend adding the following two additions to the proposed Stimulus Package:
1) Lower the corporate tax rate to 15-20% to immediately increase US companies international competitiveness, encourage them to hire, enhance stock values, and, in turn, the valuations of millions of Americans’ 401k and IRA accounts….and, in turn, their confidence about the future and then their willingness to spend; and,
2) Extend the period to three to five years (from current tax year limit) to redeposit retirement funds – This is for individuals who HAD to prematurely withdraw funds from their deflated retirement accounts (perhaps due to losing their jobs or due to a critical health condition).

[norkas]

I live in NYC and the taxes are brutal here. My question is how to pay for the infastructrue of a city including much needed repairs on bridges , roads, building etc by dropping taxes big time? I want to pay less taxes because i am sick of this massive tax but please tell me the answer to the first part of my question.

One answer is to tax soda, cigs, and other products to cover the cost to run a city and bring up badly needed repairs.

[bighat]

I truly have no idea of how a person making even 100k a year gets by in your neighborhood )being NYC When I visited and met people I have never heard of so many taxes. If you live in a neighboring state you pay taxes to work in NYC.

NYC used to be wonderful giving the greatest parades for heroes. Now they cannot even hold a free concert because of the amount of money it costs to clean up after.

The jarviks ctr (or whatever the conventional hall is called) is the most expensive facility I have ever heard of.

Maybe it is the unions or whatever the reason Wall street keeps NYC alive

Should Wall Street decide to move to another city say Texas or any state without an income tax NYC die. Even Manhattan. Multi million dollar penthouses would be gone in a day.

Whether you like it or not Wall Street keeps NYC city alive

[bighat]

Why not move up the minimum wage to wherever one makes 75k/yr. Plus make corps/govt hire everyone that applies and cannot fire anyone without the ethics comission approval.

Corporations do not pay taxes. The consumers of their products pay the taxes as the cost of taxes are added to the cost of the product.

[Beca]

BUSH LOWERED THE CORPORATE TAX RATE SIGNIFICANTLY AND THAT NEVER PRODUCED EVEN ONE JOB, NOR DID THAT SAVE ONE JOB, AND CERTAINLY IT DID NOT AVERT THIS RECESSION!
There is no verifiable proof that cutting corporate taxes ever created new jobs!!!
In 2001, Republican Congress and Bush passed a $1.36 Trillion "stimulus" bill that gave massive tax cuts to corporations and wealthy Americans. In 2001, the unemployment rate was 4%, today it is at 7.6%......­.........w­here are the millions of jobs promised as a result of tax cuts?? America lost jobs!! In 2001, 17 million Americans were so poor they could not survive without Food Stamps, today, 30 million Americans are so poor they can't survive without Food Stamps; In 2001, the Poverty Rate was at 12.7%, today the Poverty Rate is at 17%.

[bighat]

Why has not President Obama sent his own stimulus bill to both houses of congress with restrictions that neither house can add pork to the bill? The President has the support of the American people. Congress approval ratings are so low as to hardly register. Nancy and Harry may not like it but the people would and would this act would cement the President's position that he is above partisan politics but only does what is best for the country not for dems or repubs.

[billw8017]

Despite the general scorn for congress, all of the congress people have won elections, some with almost 70% of the vote. One of the cheap and easy ways for congress people to gain popularity is to "run against" congress.

All right. i like that too. My Senator is Russ Feingold. His predesessor, Proxmire gained hugely when he opposed his party's majority leader. Sometimes, we have to be a little more sober about these things.

The House Republicans improved the original Paulson plan by their opposition. (Not that anything out to the Bush administration ever worked that well) Paul Krugman praises the work of the House Democrats and Nancy Pelosi's, saying it is more practical than the administration's initial effort.. And, why wouldn't they? They are concerned and patriotic people who have served long enough to have gotten some experience putting laws together. They have long meetings where experts are closely questioned under oath. (All testimony before Congress is technically under oath. Some elude this with plain rejections)

[designingwoman]

It will be fun to see the idiot Republicans paint themselves into a corner, and hopefully out of existence. They have become a waste of perfectly good energy, and it will be good riddance to see the last conservative twit leave office.

I agree that Obama is giving them some rope to hang themselves with >-)!!

GO GET 'EM PRESIDENT OBAMA!!

[norkas]

The majority are spiteful, agressive beyond normal and will never change because there genes are such that they have animal instincts.

Allot of very good Republicans ran from the party when this became so obvious and they were not part of the gene pool/

If i am being to harsh please check out any recent research that has been done and you will see the Republicans represent (NOT ALL) mostly agression , bullying tatics, and as you can see there hatefulness for other races , cultures, poor , middle class. I personally know very well Republicans and see what they represent i was once one and found it vile what went on in there mind.

The Republicans will not stop trying to destroying Barak Obama and care little about America and its great diverse people as they have shown over the last 8 years.

I know so called Republicans that because of race and they will not admit it will not agree on one thing that Barak Obama thinks or is doing and when i say they have race issues they do not deny it.

Do not depend on the Republican party for anything they will not be there

[WASanford]

Err about those three Republicans. My concern is the rule in the Senate that requires a super majority to end debate. At its core it's undemocratic and it needs to be changed. Look at where it has left us. We are at the mercy of three Senators who represent a vanishingly small portion of our population. All the other Senators could just go home and let this very few tell us what they want.

The theory is that since only one third of the Senate is elected at a time it is a continuing body. But that’s not true! The congress is formed every two years and even though two thirds of the Senate did not stand for re-election, the Senate is a new body and is not constitutionally bound to follow the rules of the previous Senate.

It is either time for our leaders to show some leadership and remove the super majority requirement and give the American people the government we deserve, or it is time for new leaders.

[TruthmongerII]

The political system does not work: despite his victory in November, Obama and the Dems continue to be hobbled by the GOP, mainly because they fear filibuster. I believe they are wrong and should let the Rethuglicans demonstrate their contempt for ordinary people. IF WE HAD A PARLIAMENT we would not be having this debate, and the ruling party would have the clout to effect their changes. It is time for real, not perceived, change.

[machtoodis]

I want to start a march on Washington of all the unemployed uninsured angI do not think any of them really understand the depth and breath of what is happening to this country... a march that starts on the west coast and moves to DC... what do you think? 50 60 million people ... question is could we drop our petty differences for a greater good?

[bighat]

You organize it. I will send $10 for the cause. Maybe some of us could be arrested like our parents. Don't you get tired of hearing about the good ole days when our parents protested and were arrested and went to Woodstock and got their 15 minutes of fame.

Plus if you organize correctly these people on the march will not starve or get cold.

[PigLipstick]

Obama is getting no support from his own party as House Democrats watch the liberal pork master Pelosi, and her loyal minions, shovel tons of pork out the door as she makes it her life's career to single handedly bailout the slime on Wall Street. As far as the Senate is concerned, you pretty much nailed them in your piece. Your right Jane, little of this is really going to create jobs or repair infrastructure.

In desperation, Obama is appealing to the Right to counteract this evil force; a strategic move often used by leaders in the past. Meanwhile, the collapse continues unabated for states, counties, cities. small business and average Americans !

[starlady7]

Actually you are wrong on all counts.
1) Obama has more than 90% support from his own party.
2) Pelosi is not putting "Pork" into this bill...many legislators worked on this and you should be thankful that Pelosi is a strong leader.
3) Your so called "PORK" is food stamps, support to states, infrastructure, electric grid, education, green energy projects, etc.
4) Obama is NOT desperate and he is CERTAINLY not turning to the evil Right to counter anything...He has in fact now set a trap for them...letting their own failed philosophy and negativity bury them.

I almost did not respond to you because of the hatefulness, but maybe you are just trying to stir up things knowing your statements are twisted.

[the addick]

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Sometimes you suspect there is a deliberate attempt to misunderstand or worse, misrepresent, the issues and the methods being used to deal with them. Ms. Hamsher seems intent on spreading "doom and gloom" using facts(?) that she seems pretty unsure about herself. Maybe she read this stuff somewhere?
PigLipstick appears only too happy to jump onboard the "bandwagon to despair" with her. Next thing you know, they'll be telling us how Obama has sold America out for his own personal gain. How long has he been in office?

[bighat]

Why should there be help to states. Let each state pay for itself. Money all comes from the same place.