by Mark Silva
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi - who watched that $819 billion economic stimulus clear the House without a single Republican vote of support - was asked this morning if she "can honestly say that every program in this plan is solely to stimulate the economy?''
"Yes, I can,'' said the Democrat from California, echoing a phrase that has been somewhat popular in these parts lately.
How does $335 million in prevention of sexually transmitted diseases stimulate the economy, morning news host Maggie Rodriguez asked the House speaker on CBS News' Early Show this morning.
"I'll tell you how,'' Pelosi said. "I'm a big believer in prevention and we have -- there's a part of the bill on the health side of it that is about prevention. It's about it being less expensive to the states to do these prevention measures.''
That's the part of the bill that contained a Planned Parenthood provision which Pelosi supported but was cut, the speaker was reminded.
"As a matter of fact, I'm glad you mentioned it,'' Pelosi said, "because the Planned Parenthood section of this saved -- that was a saving of $700 million to the states and to the federal government because of the nature of the initiative. So when that came out, we had to add $700 million to the cost of the bill.''
If it saved money, then why did the president drop it?
"I don't... I wish that it... well, perhaps there's a better vehicle for it to be in than this because quite frankly, it's a distraction,'' Pelosi finally allowed.
.
Pelosi was read a quote: "It is our duty to speak up for those who will be hurt by this and this duty is paramount because we have been shut out of the legislative process." Can you tell me who said that?
"Well, it could've been any number of people, it could've been me a number of years ago because we never were included '' Pelosi said. "But that's different from what the opportunities that we have provided for the Republicans.''
It was Pelosi, in April of 2005.
"Yeah, and we always were shut out,'' she said.
So now Republicans have leveled the same criticism against the Democratic speaker, Rodriguez said.
"But it isn't,'' Pelosi said. "But it's different... Republicans asked for several things so that they could participate in the process and we gave them all of the opportunities they asked for and -- but it serves their purpose. When you're failing on the policy argument, you talk about process. And after that, you talk about personalities. They're failing on the policy aspect.''
"If these votes go along party lines, as they're expected to,'' Rodriguez asked, "can we hold Democrats, can we hold you responsible if this does not stop the bleeding and things, in fact, get worse?
"Well, we are definitely stepping up to the plate to say we will be accountable,'' Pelosi said. "We have the well being of the American people at stake and we're going to do what is best for them. We will be accountable for it. That's why the choices that we made had to be very carefully made because we had to deliver on meeting the needs of the American people.
"And I'm very proud that seven days, seven days--eight days, actually, one week and one day after President Obama gave the nation hope, took us in a new direction, suggested some initiatives for change that we in this House of Representatives ave echoed his call to action for swift and bold action to help the American people. That's what I'm very proud of. The Republicans, as I say, have had their chance, they decided to oppose. That's their choice.''
Comments
How could Republicans be shut out of the process when they were given $300 billion in tax cuts and the president personally directed House Dems to extract controversial funding from the bill per the GOP's request?
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | January 29, 2009 8:12 AM
Your part of the problem! You and everyone that is in Congress. All of our problems stem from the actions of Congress. From the committee heads all the way down the line. Let's look at the numbers in just in the Planned Parenthood $700 million dollars added to the stimulus. About promoting life instead of legalizing murder, Not a good position when you consider yourself a "practicing catholic".
Posted by: Paul | January 29, 2009 8:35 AM
Maybe these states will have to raise property taxes to cover the 13.5 million these states would have recieved.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 8:55 AM
Understandable when you consider the right believes birth controll is abortion.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 9:39 AM
Matt, the so-called "tax cuts" in this porkulus bill are not cuts at all. They're refundable credits to people who already pay little or no taxes, designed to expand the number of people receiving government largesse to an absolute majority, and entrench their support for Dems. They are not designed for stimulus. They are a crass redistribution program for the purpose of buying votes with dollars confiscated from the people who actually bear the tax burden.
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspirator | January 29, 2009 9:40 AM
Nancy, who refused to meet with any Republicans, and who stuffed this ill-conceived plan with pork, pork and more pork.
This is a disgrace. Our children's great-grandchildren will be paying for this bailout, while Obama and his "guests" dine on extremely expensive beef. Surprised he didn't serve pork.
Posted by: Liz | January 29, 2009 9:51 AM
New polls reveal only 42% approval for Democratic Reelection and Pork Act as new facts on so called stimulus plan are revealed to Americans. MSM desperate to rally wavering support. DNC to rally troops with massive Obama kool aid emails. Have fun lefties, you won, stand on your own, can't blame Bush or the conservatives on this one. Anybody for a new Obama poll?
Posted by: Bubba Porter | January 29, 2009 10:15 AM
I only wish the "conservatives" had this much concern when they voted lock-step with Bush to spend 1 trillion and counting on the Iraq disaster.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 10:21 AM
Winger, what page of the plan did you read that from? Have you been listening to rash again?
Posted by: Xcellentform | January 29, 2009 10:41 AM
This is no stimulus bill. Pork is not stimulus. Giving millions to Planned Parenthood is not economic stimulus. Giving billions to ACORN is not economic stimulus. Most of the money for infrastructure improvements don't happen until 2010 and 2011. That is not stimulus. For all the money being spent and the jobs Obama says will be created, comes to nearly $300,000 spent for every job. It costs every taxpayer around $9,000. They'd be better off just giving every taxpayer a $5,000 check. It would be cheaper and would actually do the economy some good.
Posted by: John D | January 29, 2009 11:01 AM
After the republicans vote for their friends on wall street....they seem to forget one mans pork is another mans bread and butter. Landscaping projects........why keep those workers jobs, it's not wall street. Health care....why invest money to change out of date systems to make it more efficient and cost less, it doesn't help wall street. Planned parenthood.......it will make jobs in that field.....but they don't like "that" field. They cry about slow or the low amount spent on infrastructure.......without even considering the fact that there are only so many infrastructure jobs ready to go. I guess as usual, they don't believe in planning. Can't build a bridge without engineering and plans. Sort of like their 1 trillion and counting waste of money in Iraq that had no plan.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 11:52 AM
John D.,
Sorry CJD, you have no credibility, he who was saying the economy was just fine a year ago. Also, your figures, and your assertions, as usual, are total b.s.--
First, there’s the bogus talking point that the Obama plan will cost $275,000 per job created. Why is it bogus? Because it involves taking the cost of a plan that will extend over several years, creating millions of jobs each year, and dividing it by the jobs created in just one of those years.
It’s as if an opponent of the school lunch program were to take an estimate of the cost of that program over the next five years, then divide it by the number of lunches provided in just one of those years, and assert that the program was hugely wasteful, because it cost $13 per lunch. (The actual cost of a free school lunch, by the way, is $2.57.)
The true cost per job of the Obama plan will probably be closer to $100,000 than $275,000 — and the net cost will be as little as $60,000 once you take into account the fact that a stronger economy means higher tax receipts.
Next, write off anyone who asserts that it’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.---Krugman
For the whole article (don't bother, JD, just go on listening to "I hope he fails" Rush).
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/opinion/26krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Posted by: dt☢ | January 29, 2009 12:12 PM
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill
Posted by: Pragmatist | January 29, 2009 12:42 PM
What we have just seen is the first step to their agenda of hoping Obama and the country fail for political gain.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 12:42 PM
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill
Posted by: Pragmatist | January 29, 2009 12:42 PM
In my sentences I go where no man has gone before...I am a boon to the English language.
-- George W. Bush
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 1:24 PM
Wrongo, Bill. If Obama fails, the country succeeds. If Obama succeeds, America is toast.
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspirator | January 29, 2009 1:36 PM
Vast Right Wing Conspirator-
Hoover once thought the same way as you, tried to keep balanced Budgets on the edge of a Depression. He only managed to make it worse. If Obama fails, the country fails. And you folks seem to be doing your best to make sure if its not done your way, it doesn't get done at all. Unfortunately for you, the American people have tired of this culture of selfish raising of party principles over national interests.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty | January 29, 2009 2:33 PM
"the American people have tired of this culture of selfish raising of party principles over national interests."
Stephen, I can only assume that the staggering irony of your own statement is entirely lost on you. Obama and Pelosi are the very epitome and embodiment of the thing you claim to condemn.
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspirator | January 29, 2009 3:04 PM
Maybe it's just me -- I don't see where funding STD prevention belongs in the stimulus package (unless the "stimulus" we're talking about has nothing to do with the economy). I don't mind seeing it funded OUTSIDE the package, but the logic of putting it inside seemed, at best, convoluted to me. And, for that reason, I get why the conservatives might have had problems with THAT PARTICULAR line item. It's one of the few things I "get" about conservatives -- the rest just make me nauseous.
Posted by: Op109 | January 29, 2009 3:37 PM
Posted by: Op109 | January 29, 2009 3:37 PM
I believe this was removed in an effort to find bi-partisan support. As well as adding more tax cuts. Didn't make a difference....they are invested in failure.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 4:22 PM
Posted by: Op109 | January 29, 2009 3:37 PM
I believe this was removed in an effort to find bi-partisan support. As well as adding more tax cuts. Didn't make a difference....they are invested in failure.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 4:29 PM
Posted by: Op109 | January 29, 2009 3:37 PM
I believe this was removed in an effort to find bi-partisan support. As well as adding more tax cuts. Didn't make a difference....they are invested in failure.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 4:29 PM
Posted by: Op109 | January 29, 2009 3:37 PM
I believe this was removed in an effort to find bi-partisan support. As well as adding more tax cuts. Didn't make a difference....they are invested in failure.
Posted by: bill r. | January 29, 2009 4:32 PM
Pelosi needs to be replaced; she is an embarrassment to women. The government is not by the people for the people, it is a "society" that is not leading the way "we the people" desire. Vote Constitution Party 2012!
Posted by: SM | February 1, 2009 5:15 AM