by Frank James
It sounds like the meeting between President Obama and House Republicans was friendly and respectful, with Republicans coming away feeling that Obama was a man they could work with.
Unfortunately, it sounds like their antipathy for House Democrats runs so deep that Obama's chances of getting legislation that both sides in the House can agree on aren't very good.
The meeting sounds like it was fairly upbeat, considering the gravity of the situation facing the nation.
According CQ (subscription required):
House Republicans said that Obama defended the existing stimulus package but assured them there were would be room to incorporate some changes during negotiations between the House and Senate over a final version.
Rep. Henry E. Brown Jr, R-S.C., described the meeting as having "a relaxed atmosphere. Everybody was jovial." He added that from Obama's remarks "it was pretty evident that he had a good handle on the content of the bill."
Rep. Peter T. King, R-N.Y., said Obama drew laughter and cheers from the lawmakers when he agreed to extend the question and answer period from 25 minutes to 30 minutes, even though it would make him late to meet GOP senators.
King said Obama told them "The Senate can wait. You see I can pander with the best of you."
From descriptions of the meeting, it's possible the president might've been doing a little triangulating, allowing House GOP members to vent about their oppressors, i.e., the House's majority Democrats while giving his other sympathetic ear to those in the party he leads, all in an effort to get as much of his first major legislative initiative through.
Or maybe the president sees himself in the role of go-between, a bridge to both parties in the House.
The report in the Capitol Hill newspaper the Hill gives further evidence that Obama put some distance between himself and House Democrats which allowed him to narrow the distance between himself and the Republicans.
GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) said "the most encouraging statement the president made today, I think, was that he had no pride of authorship on this bill."
"We take that to mean that tomorrow's vote is only the first step in the process, only the beginning," Cantor said.
House Republicans immediately reconvened without the president to continue working on the bill they're crafting as an alternative, Cantor said.
But how Democrats will react to GOP alternative ideas -- and what influence Obama will even seek to have over the legislative process -- was far from clear. Even as the meeting was occurring, it was still unknown how many amendments Republicans will be allowed to offer.
House Republicans erupted in applause after GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence (Ind.) pleaded with Obama to tell Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to include Republican ideas in the bill and in future legislation.
The president did not specifically address that plea, however, according to attendees of the meeting. But he did tell the packed room that there will be "ample time" to alter the stimulus package after it is passed in the House and Senate, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said.
The general consensus following Obama's hourlong session with House Republicans was that the president is a nice guy but didn't change a lot of minds on the package headed for a vote on the House floor tomorrow.
Meanwhile, Paul Bedard's US News and World Report "Washington Whispers" blog has some of what Obama said told House Republicans.
- "He wants to deal with the housing market more aggressively."
- "This is just the first step."
- "Obama said the he would 'like not to have to spend the stimulus money.'"
- "He also said that he has 'no interest in increasing government just to increase the size of government.'"
- On taxes, "Obama says tax relief for some working families must come from payroll so even families who don't pay income taxes get relief and they will spend it."
- On GOP complaints, "he said that 'there will be time to beat him up and a time for politics. He said I understand that and I will watch you on Fox News and feel bad about myself.'"
- "Obama said if we can do more small business tax relief, 'we should do it, but I am just as concerned about the long term impact of tax cuts as I am about spending.'"
- "He also issued concern about the debt. 'I will be judged by the legacy I have left behind. I don't want to leave our children with a legacy of debt. I am inheriting an annual yearly debt of over $1 trillion.'"
Much of what he said was obviously a smart politician tailoring his message for his audience, in this case conservative Republicans. That doesn't diminish the importance, however, of this kind of outreach to his political opponents.
Woody Allen said 80 percent of success is just showing up. And the president certainly did more than just show up.
Comments
I think Prez Obama is making a smart move by letting the Repubican party define themselves as the: "Party of Rush". The Republican Party is currently suffering from a leadership vaccum. One could make the argument that this leadership vacuum has existed since Katrina, when Bush's credibility and popularity began it's downhill slide.
So, much like in political campaigns, Obama is trying to define the Republican Party before they can define themselves. When people think of the Republicans, Obama doesn't want them to think of Boehner, McConnell or even Palin. He wants them to think of a fat-butt, opiate-addicted, thrice-divorced radio talk show host with a reputation for intolerance, negativity, and one of the largest egos in America.
Since Rush's massive ego won't allow him to think strategically on this issue, he's more than willing to play right into Obama's hand. His adoring listeners will continue to reinforce Rush's views of himself by enclosing him in a bubble of "mega-dittos" and elected Republicans will continue to appear on his show so they can kiss his ring, mostly because they still feel some debt of gratitude towards Rush for his role in the last century during the Clinton administration.
Rush will continue to hog the limelight, and continue to say stupid crap like he's "rooting for Obama to fail", except he'll probably escalate it, cause that's his M.O.. The Republicans, having lost most of their sane members over the last 8 years, will continue to play along, not realizing that most Americans want Obama to succeed in his goals of getting the economy back on track and wrapping up our foreign adventures.
Prez Obama can't lose, really. If, in 2-4 years, things are still awful, or more awful, he can make the legitimate argument that it's hard to make progress when the loyal opposition is rooting for your - and by extension, the American people's - failure, and that the solution is to vote more of them out of office. If Obama succeeds, he'll have done so despite Republican support, which will allow him to make the argument that Republicans aren't interested in governing, only ruling.
Prez Obama's goal is to have every American thinking about the Rush wing of the Republican party when they cast their ballot, when they are choosing between the Dems and the Republicans. If he can achieve that, he'll tie the Republican Party's fate to Limbagh's fat butt ands sink them to the bottom.
It might feel good to some Republicans to have Limbaugh leading the charge, and it's no doubt gonna produce some short-term gain in terms of exposure, but in the long run, it's a serious mistake. Republicans are walking into a trap.
Posted by: Hey Joe | January 27, 2009 4:57 PM
The comment from "Hey Joe" makes the erroneous assumption that President Obama is dealing with Republican objections to his stimulus package as if they come only from Rush Limbaugh acolytes.
Moderate Republicans have legitimate concerns about the enormous size and the targeted recipients of the taxpayer bailout. In trying to blunt the unprecedented debt we're saddling our future generations with--which the President has gone on record as saying--the Republican emphasis on tax cuts vs. spending deserves more attention. Bipartisanship is what he promised and what the nation expects.
Compromise is required lest we continue the partisanship people have voted to reject. All Republicans are not represented by Limbaugh's, as I hope all Democrats are not defined by Reid's or Pelosi's.
The President needs to be pragmatically above the fray, as has been a major key to his succcess in securing the election.
Posted by: Richard Palzer | January 27, 2009 6:47 PM
TOO IMPORTANT TO BE MIS-LED, THIS TIME
Government Stimulus = borrowed money that gets spent in the economy, that otherwise would not be spent
Great stimulus = borrowed money that gets spent over and over again - (multiplier effect)
In a shrinking economy, tax cuts are a poor stimulus because they are likely to be saved (not spent) by people and businesses loosing their jobs and revenue respectively. It is a government re-distribution regardless of whether it goes to a few businesses or a few people. (In a growing economy, Tax cuts ARE stimulative - so we should delay most tax cuts till the economy starts growing again)
Contraceptives - morally offensive to some - are great stimulus because the same money gets spent by women, then again by retailers and again by drug companies.
MUCH BETTER THAN contraceptives are expenditures on Infrastructure, eduction, healthcare and energy because they not only multiply spending right here in America, they create permanent new capacity for the middle-class to earn and spend. They also contain several backlogs of demand that will get spending happening quickly:
- 45 million uninsured that would ALSO get the healthcare industry growing again
- 10 year shortage of teachers that would ALSO get kids get better educated
- 10 year backlog of school construction that would ALSO kids get better educated
- 5-10 year backlog of new broadband in rural areas AND America that would ALSO generate more commerce, education, entertainment
- 2-5 year backlog of wind/solar projects that would ALSO reduce our dependence on foreign oil
MOST of this money goes through small-medium size businesses creating jobs AND preventing government bureaucracy.
Sure, even these fast ideas will take most of 2009 to get the money flowing but that wil be badly needed if we are at 10% unemployment by then?
Posted by: Young Atheart | January 27, 2009 7:22 PM
Hey Joe, not all us are "ditto heads". Rush plays you lefties like a kid with a yo-yo. Conservatives will rise if our principles remain steadfast and no Bush to blame (you lefties will never let this excuse die). I watch in utter amazement as you lefties swamp the big boat (see Gibbs story) with the Democratic Reelection and Pork Act, while dismantling of our national security, coddling of our enemies, and sucking up to all the failures in government as the best thing since sliced bread. Maybe you think you can tax us to death, but unfortunately you are dependent on our wealth which is going away if you follow the economy. Ever stop to think that the contraction might be a direct result of distrust for Obama and Dems. policies? How about the layoffs or lack of new employment from small business being the result of facing massive new taxes and uncertain environmental regulations? Obama is making government work not jobs, when the stimulus dollars run out there still be the need for private sector jobs created by the wealthy conservatives and businesses. Just be patient, watch and learn. Worry about yourself and all the other gloating lefties when the so called stimulus crumbs run out, then holler for more money from our bankrupt treasury.
Posted by: Bubba Porter | January 27, 2009 8:04 PM
Moderate Republicans have legitimate concerns about the enormous size and the targeted recipients of the taxpayer bailout. In trying to blunt the unprecedented debt we're saddling our future generations with--which the President has gone on record as saying--the Republican emphasis on tax cuts vs. spending deserves more attention.
Posted by: Richard Palzer | January 27, 2009 6:47 PM
Richie,
Gee, if only you would have thought this BS during the free spending BushCo years...
If you haven't noticed yet let me fill you in. The GOPukes have basically become a regional party (the south) and as such, especially in the House, they really don't have many moderate members left in their caucus.
Your party FAILED and now they're paying the price for that. Deal with it.
Posted by: dano | January 27, 2009 9:30 PM
With the mounting job casualties, here's hoping SCOTUS either finds someone, somewhere, has standing to require BHO's birth certificate or fixes attention on a criminal indictment before he wins his War on Prosperity.
Posted by: Ted | January 27, 2009 10:36 PM
Obama is doing right by inclusion. The trouble is politicians are all actors and they all should win academy awards fro their "make nice" performances.
Posted by: lochnessmonster | January 28, 2009 7:02 AM
Hey Bubba, Rush plays you dito-heads like, well, dito-heads. He calls you that and you still listen. Point proven. He leads you all like your minister of hate, and you all are too scared to speak up in church and ask a question. He completely takes advantage of an emotional defficiency that conservatives have.
Obama has done more in the last week to create national security than bushCo did in 8 years.
I don't think dropping a bomb on your enemy's head is coddling.
Obama is not proposing to raise taxes. Are you still living in last year's news cycle?
Did you just try to blame Obama for the current economy???? You are a nut job. Really. This downturn has been documented to start about 14 months ago....remember the good ol friggin days when the DOW was 14K? In the construction industry, this downturn started 3 years ago. That completely happened on the pug watch. We used the pug tax cuts, and the pug tax rebates to stimulate the economy, and guess what fool, it was a horrible disaster. And you have the ineptness to come here and blame Obama?!?
What massive new taxes do you refer to that Obama has in store for small businesses? There is none.....You've been listening to your hero rush too much. I'll educate you on business......small business is laying people off becasue of a perfect financial storm: No buyers; Higher insurance rates; Higher comodity prices; Higher service prices (due to gasoline); And a commercial banking market that is in the crapper. Absolutely NONE of these things magically appeared on Obama's watch, but they ALL drasticaly worsened over the last 8 years.
Last time I checked, union trade jobs are real private jobs, which are needed to work on the infrustructure spending. Did you sprinkle a little crack on your cereal this morning?
I can tell that you have been listening to rush. Nothing you say makes sense to the educated.
Posted by: Xcellentform | January 28, 2009 9:53 AM
Gonna be hard when you have the minority whip getting on TV and out and out lie about things in the plan. Cantor claiming a 300 million for lawn sculpture that does not exsist.
Posted by: bill r. | January 28, 2009 10:56 AM
With the mounting job casualties, here's hoping SCOTUS either finds someone, somewhere, has standing to require BHO's birth certificate or fixes attention on a criminal indictment before he wins his War on Prosperity.
Posted by: Ted | January 27, 2009 10:36 PM
War on Prosperity? Cute. Tell you what, let's get McCain in there so he can continue the Bush policies that led this period of unprecedented prosperity.
Talk about a deadender...
------
It's all well and good that Obama wants to make nice, but he needs also to recognize that he and the Cong. Dems won the last election quite convincingly.
Posted by: a blinkin | January 28, 2009 12:12 PM
Bubba, Rush has played you for a fool. Remember that he is an entertainer like Colbert or even Leno. The drool you quoted from Rush does not make much sense. "How about the layoffs or lack of new employment from small business being the result of facing massive new taxes and uncertain environmental regulations?" Massive new taxes? This downturn started long before companies knew who was going to be elected. Obama has been in office for a week now. No tax increases have even been proposed. Get your news and facts from real sources, not entertainers.
Posted by: pd | January 28, 2009 1:48 PM