Leading economists take on the $800 billion stimulus scam

It seems some of the leading economists do not agree with Obama and that there are other options… Obama’s fear mongering to pass his pork roll has the economy in a panic and making things worse…

Yesterday, the United States Senate passed a sweeping $800 billion stimulus plan that President Barack Obama says he would like to sign into law as soon as possible. “There is no disagreement,” Obama has declared, “that we need action by our government, a recovery plan that will help jump-start the economy.”

Reason.com asked a panel of leading economists for their response to the stimulus package.

Robert Higgs

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

This legislation entails the addition of a huge increment to the burden of debt the public must bear, directly or indirectly. It redirects resources on a grand scale from uses consumers value to uses politicians value and thereby impoverishes the general public. I’ve written along these lines at greater length here and here.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

All of it works. The trouble is what it works for, which is to reward virtually every special interest allied with the Democrats and to guarantee the recipients’ future support for the pirates who are now sending the booty their way. It is eerily similar to the New Dealers’ use of the Works Progress Administration and other big relief programs to buy votes and bulk up their political machine.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

For the economy in general, doing nothing is vastly preferable to doing the stimulus package, but doing nothing is not a political option; indeed, it would be political suicide. Which shows that only by adopting economically destructive policies can politicians survive. Do you see something wrong in this picture? Given the dominant ideology and the political institutions that now exist, economically rational public policy is incompatible with political viability. See here. Having hit bottom, the politicians can only do one thing: keep digging. If Hell is down there, they’ll reach it, sooner or later.

Robert Higgs is senior fellow in political economy for The Independent Institute and editor of the Institute’s quarterly journal The Independent Review.

Jeffrey Rogers Hummel

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

The biggest problem with the stimulus package is the amount by which it increases total government spending, the national debt, and therefore future taxes.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

If by “work,” you mean alleviate the depression, there is nothing in the stimulus that will do so.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

Not at all. The best thing the government could do is to cut spending and taxes. Doing nothing is a second-best option.

Jeffrey Rogers Hummel is associate professor of economics at San Jose State University and the author of Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men: A History of the American Civil War.
Megan McArdle

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

Even if you accept the theory of the stimulus, the package is not well-structured. A good stimulus package should be designed to move money out the door rapidly, then stop. This program is designed to move money out the door slowly, and keep going. Moreover, the vast size of the package is going to add big costs in the not-so-distant future which have barely been discussed.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

Expanding unemployment benefits and food stamps—the “automatic fiscal stabilizers”—are relatively low cost and transparent. They target money to the people whose consumption is contracting the most, and they will naturally shrink as the economy recovers.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

I would like to see more proof of the statement that doing something is better than doing nothing. The Keynesian arguments upon which Obama’s statements are based work out neatly in the textbooks, but there’s little proof that they actually make things better, in aggregate, in the real world. And the current situation is all the proof you need that there are massive holes in our old textbook models.

Megan McArdle writes about economics, business, and politics at The Atlantic.

Deirdre McCloskey

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package? 

It’s not targeted, not temporary, not timely. Especially the last. Too slow, too slow, alas.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

At less than full employment the Keynesian stuff works. So the minority of the quickie expenditures will “put people back to work”—until we return to almost-full employment, which will happen pretty quickly in the recovery. At that point the stimulus will merely crowd out private investment. In the short run people might get more cheerful, too, always a good thing. But in two years the recession will be over. And the myth will grow up—rather similar to the ones about FDR and war expenditure—that Obama did it. Essentially, Obama will get credit for the self-adjusting character of the economy. I reckon we should start preparing that other face of Mount Rushmore.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

I agree on the money and banking side, not on the real expenditure side. We are in a financial panic, which happens only in a few recessions (1907, 1929). In other words, the TARP is way, way more important than the stimulus. Truly, Something Must Be Done about the banks. That’s a logic of second best—the government fouled up the banking system (the most regulated part of the economy), so maybe the government should help clean up the mess. Someone needs to, and I reckon it’s not going to be the Icelandic government. J.P. Morgan, where are you when we need you?

Contributing Editor Deirdre McCloskey teaches economics, history, English, and communication at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Her latest book is The Myth of Statistical Significance.

Allan H. Meltzer

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

No thought is given to the medium and longer-term consequences. We are very likely to have large inflation in the next few years.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

Yes, extending unemployment compensation, tax subsidy to homebuyers, some of the permanent tax cuts.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

Yes. But doing the right things is the option.

Allan H. Meltzer is the Allan H. Meltzer University Professor of political economy and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Jeffrey A. Miron

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

The package is focused on increased spending and tax cuts that fail to improve incentives. I am extremely skeptical that the U.S. has $500 billion in additional productive spending, especially if done in a hurry. In most areas government spending is too high, not too low.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

Roughly, no.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

Doing nothing is always an option, and in my view it would be better than the stimulus. Better yet, we should fix those aspects of current policy that ought to be fixed independent of the crisis. Seehere and here.

Jeffrey A. Miron is a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University.

Michael C. Munger

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

The creation of new bureaucratic and regulatory structures, restrictions on creation of liquidity. The genius of the American system, for all its flaws, has been that we can mobilize lots of liquidity quickly. Silicon Valley exists because you could sit down, make a pitch, and get $10 million that afternoon.

If we start governing finance like we govern universities, or city councils, we are going to lose that. Having committees, and a bunch of forms to sign off on, and stamps…Hernando de Soto wrote about systems like this. They strangle business, investment, and growth.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

Keynes said that Y=C+I+G. Borrowing money to raise “G” (government spending) will work, I suppose. But the cost to future generations is enormous. I am amazed by the hypocrisy of both sides. John McCain calls the stimulus “intergenerational theft.” Well, he’s right, but he came late to this wisdom. The Republicans have been just pouring out new deficit spending since 2002.

And then Obama says he doesn’t want to do tired old ideas, and failed economics. But he is doingexactly what the Republicans did: huge deficit-financed spending on largely useless or irrelevant programs designed to reward political friends. The only thing that’s different is the identity of the “friends.”

So, some of the spending may increase measured GDP slightly for 2009. But the price is increased inflationary pressures in 2010, and the squandering of the birthright of our children for decades.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

This makes me furious. Doing nothing is not an option—anymore. Because first President Bush, and now President Obama, have engaged in a completely irresponsible fear campaign. “We must do something, or you should cower in helpless fear, behind locked doors, in darkened rooms!” Presidents should not use this kind of fear as a weapon to pass their pet projects. Roosevelt, for all his flaws, got it right: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Well, not quite right: it turns out we need to fear fear itself, and also President Obama.

The sensible thing to do at this point would be to make an offer, at 40 cents on the dollar, for the “toxic” assets, both the collaterlized debt obligations packaged by Freddy and Fannie, and also the credit default swap “insurance” derivatives sold by AIG (and some other firms, but mostly AIG). Since AIG wrote so many “naked” CDSs, even for people who don’t own the underlying, or “insured” asset, they are going to keep hemorrhaging until someone puts a floor on the value of the assets.

So, a one-time, take it or leave it, offer. One big reason that credit markets are frozen is the uncertainty created by Treasury indecision and vagueness. Asset owners are holding out for a better price, and they are trying to negotiate through the Senate, not the Treasury. Obama needs to lead here, and say, “Take this partial buyout, or hang on to the asset at your peril. There is no better deal coming tomorrow.”

Michael C. Munger is professor of economics and chair of the department of political science at Duke University.
William A. Niskanen

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

Nothing in the package increases the incentive to work, save, invest, or increase productivity. Any spending stimulus should be limited to increasing the demand for housing, in order to increase the value of the mortgage-backed securities that are limiting the ability of the banks to lend.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

No. Almost all of the tax cuts are welfare payments channeled through the tax system, not reductions in marginal rates.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

No fiscal stimulus program is a viable option. Use monetary policy to stimulate demand. Consider an optional fiscal stimulus plan consisting only of selective marginal tax rate cuts and a temporary subsidy to increase the demand for housing.

William A. Niskanen is chairman emeritus and a distinguished senior economist at the Cato Institute.

Johan Norberg

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

The biggest problem is that it destroys savings by using them on projects that the majority did not think were reasonable a year ago. We take capital that would have been available to companies and poorer countries and use it to create a stimulus that will have its largest impact after the economy has already turned the corner—so that it will contribute to another round of boom and bust.

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

That depends on what the meaning of “works” is. The tax credit will work. Not as they intended it, though. But it gives people more money, which they will save because they can see that the government is building up a huge deficit that they will be forced to pay for in the future. And then those savings will come in handy.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

No. Every single crisis in the last 100 years shows that doing nothing would have been preferable to doing bad things. But he is right that it is not an option in the current political climate. Now what applies is the politicians’ logic from Yes, Prime Minister: “Something must be done. This is something. Therefore it must be done.”

Johan Norberg is a Swedish author and historian of ideas, and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He is currently writing a book on the financial crisis.
Mark Perry

1. Outside of the obvious pork and special interest goodies, what are the biggest problems you see with the stimulus package?

There are many problems with the stimulus package, but there are several that stand out. First, like all fiscal stimulus packages in the past, the current one will not impact the economy at the right time for the intended stimulus effect, due to the inevitable problems of long lags. Much of the intended expansionary fiscal effects won’t happen until next year and even 2011, and it’s likely the economy will have recovered sufficiently by then so that the fiscal stimulus will be unnecessary, and might actually be destabilizing. Second, the fiscal stimulus has to be paid for eventually in the form of higher taxes, which will have a negative economic effect in the future, i.e. the “fiscal child abuse” effect. That is, any positive short-term effects of this stimulus package will be more than offset by future negative effects in the form of reduced future economic growth, decreased investments, and lower incomes. 

2. Is there anything in the stimulus package that you think will work? If so, what?

The fiscal stimulus will work only in the sense that it will serve to stimulate the approval ratings of the President and other politicians.

3. Obama says that doing nothing is not an option. Do you agree with that?

No. The market economy has an underappreciated, but amazing ability to correct and reverse economic imbalances and problems on its own, and that economic self-correcting resiliency works best in the absence of government interference. 

Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan.

via The Reason.com Stimulus Symposium: Leading economists sound off on the $800 billion stimulus package – Reason Magazine.


Stimulus Package Gives Illegal Immigrants Tax Credits

That’s right folks, on top of the pork filled stimulus package, there is nothing preventing illegal aliens from getting the tax credit as well… 

Change You Can Believe In!

WASHINGTON (AP) – The $800 billion-plus economic stimulus measure making its way through Congress could steer government checks to illegal immigrants, a top Republican congressional official asserted Thursday.

The legislation, which would send tax credits of $500 per worker and $1,000 per couple, expressly disqualifies nonresident aliens, but it would allow people who don’t have Social Security numbers to be eligible for the checks.

Undocumented immigrants who are not eligible for a Social Security number can file tax returns with an alternative number. A House-passed version of the economic recovery bill and one making its way through the Senate would allow anyone with such a number, called an individual taxpayer identification number, to qualify for the tax credits.

A revolt among GOP conservatives to similar provisions of a 2008 economic stimulus bill, which sent rebate checks to most wage earners, forced Democratic congressional leaders to add stricter eligibility requirements. That legislation, enacted in February 2008, required that people have valid Social Security numbers in order to get checks.

The GOP official voiced concerns about the latest economic aid measure on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

Republicans have already blasted the package for including what they argue is wasteful spending and omitting tax cuts for wealthier people and businesses they say are needed to jump-start the anemic economy.

Not a single Republican voted for an $819 billion version of the plan when it passed the House on Wednesday.

GOP senators arranged a midday news conference to voice their concerns.

via Hill Republican: Stimulus aids illegal immigrants.

Obama Urges GOP to Keep Politics to a Minimum on Stimulus – First 100 Days of Presidency – Politics FOXNews.com

OK, of you want to keep politics out of it Obama let’s take Nancy Pelosi out of it… She has injected her politics into it with both pork barrel spending and trying to lock the Republicans out of the process only to try and shove this overbloated pig down the American people’s throats… That is unless that is your plan as well and these olive branches to the Republicans are nothing more than a pony show… This is more than philosophical difference, it is about identifying problems with this bill, the biggest being wasted spending for pet projects of the liberals in Congress and possibly the White House.

The spending all must be part of job creation and putting money into the hands and individuals to spend, not supplementing the states budgets or funding various liberal agendas…

Change You Can Believe In!

President Obama’s meetings with House and Senate Republicans resulted in a mutual desire to find solutions for the economy that are not ideologically driven, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.

“I do think there is a genuine sense of cooperation that is involved in the meetings. I think we will have Republican support for this bill,” he said, noting that the negotiations with Republicans on tax and spending policies aren’t over. “I don’t think today was the beginning or the end or just part of that process.”

Gibbs did not say what the president was considering coming out of suggestions offered by Republicans, but not one item can fix the economy. Confronted with the scenario that maybe only a dozen Republicans would support the bill that is expected to face a vote Wednesday, Gibbs said, “We’ll take what we can get.”

He added that the process will keep moving after the vote.

Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill earlier in the day, Obama said he understands the concerns of House Republicans but the massive economic recovery package he has proposed is aimed at getting the country out of the ditch it’s in and on the right track. 

Obama said he is “absolutely confident” that compromises can be reached, “but the key right now is to make sure we keep politics to a minimum.”

“There is some legitimate philosophical differences with parts of my plans that the Republicans have, and I respect that. In some cases, they just may not be as familiar with what is in the package as I would like. I don’t expect 100 percent agreement but I do hope that we can all put politics aside and do the American people’s business right now,” he said. 

House GOP leaders said they were pleased with the conversation with Obama. Several said they still had the message — listen to our suggestions and use them. 

“The door of our conference will stay open to this president,” said GOP Conference Chairman Mike Pence. 

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor said the problem for Republicans isn’t negotiating with the president, who has “serious intent,” but working with House Democrats. 

“We are hopeful that (the president) can impose upon Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi to adopt the same attitude (as him) because frankly it has not been forthcoming whatsoever. There have been no meetings with Speaker Pelosi and Republicans. There have already been three between the president and Republicans in the House,” he said.

“We have yet to see one Republican proposal included in this plan,” said Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington before the meeting.

Obama said the “statistics every day underscore the urgency of the situation.” He said Americans want to go back to work, gain energy independence, better schools and stronger infrastructure and they want all of it done “wisely so that we’re not wasting taxpayer money.”

Obama added his proposal is “just one leg in a multi-legged stool.” He also wants Congress and his administration to develop tighter regulations, more controls on the release of money to help shore up financial institutions and greater coordination with other countries. 

Of chief concern to Republican leaders is the amount of spending and the tax approach outlined in the proposal being considered by lawmakers this week. Many Republicans remain skeptical of provisions they say don’t match the talk about job creation.

“We have concerns that the plan that House Democrats are going to bring to the floor will not work,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner before the meeting. “And at the end of the day, our big move today will be to ask the president to help us. Help us make this plan better so that it will put Americans back to work.” 

Boehner said afterward that he thought many in the conference and the president himself “enjoyed the conversation.”

Louisiana Sen. David Vitter said before the meeting that he plans to tell Obama that he likes the approach that he’s offered, but doesn’t see that being followed on Capitol Hill.

“It’s line after line after line of favorite liberal spending programs and it amounts to a big government bill not a job creation,” Vitter told FOX News.

But Republicans did not offer any of their own changes to the Senate package that was voted out of the Appropriations Committee Tuesday morning on a largely party line vote of 21-9.
All the Democrats on the panel approved the bill while 9 Republicans voted against it.

Of the four Republicans who voted for the nearly $830 billion package, three — Sens. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Kit Bond of Missouri — made it clear they were just voting to move the process along, reserving the right to oppose the bill in the end on the floor.

On the House side, Republicans rallied the rank-and-file to oppose measures that they say include too much spending and not enough tax incentives. Several pointed to examples of $4 billion for community development groups and millions more for the National Endowment of the Arts. More than 200 amendments had been sent to the House clerk on the legislation headed for debate on Wednesday. 

The version sent to the Senate calls for about $190 in assistance like Medicaid to the states and an extension of unemployment benefits; about $365 billion for infrastructure and science; and $275 billion in tax provisions. The Senate was also expected to add a patch for the Alternative Minimum Tax, which hits middle class taxpayers hardest. That would cost $70 billion or so in 2009, which would bring the total package to about $900 billion.

According to the Congressional Budget Office about $608 billion, or 73 percent of the $830 billion, would be spent in 2009 and 2010. The quicker the money gets spent, the more stimulative it is, say economists.

The Democratic version in the House calls for about 64 percent to be spent in the first two years. Pelosi has said she thinks Congress can get a bill to the president’s desk by the President’s Day recess next month. 

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen said that lawmakers who say no to the recovery plan are going to have to explain to constituents “why at this critical point in our history … why they didn’t support the economy.”

He added that Democrats have included net operating loss and energy tax provisions preferred by Republicans and suggested that Obama has worked overtime to get GOP support.

“So it’s unfortunate that the signs that we are hearing indicate that Republicans aren’t giving this as good a look as I would have hoped,” he said.

Neither Republicans nor Obama have indicated where they may be willing to make changes to the legislation, but both sides have said they don’t have any “pride of authorship” of the huge package. 

In a sign that Obama is willing to compromise, the president told Democrats to jettison from the package family planning funds for low-income people. Republicans have criticized the provision as an example of wasteful spending that would neither create jobs nor otherwise improve the economy.

“He asked them to take it out he established a set of principles for spending to boost economic growth over the course of a two-year period and the contraceptive funding was not part of those principles,” said Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton. Burton said the contraceptive funding issue had become a “lightning rod” and that without it the large bill had a better chance of winning bipartisan support.

FOX News’ Trish Turner and Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

via Obama Urges GOP to Keep Politics to a Minimum on Stimulus – First 100 Days of Presidency – Politics FOXNews.com .

ABC News: Obama to Seek Input From Republicans on Economy

Serious now that the news has reported that the republican’s ideas were shut out of any previous discussions…

I wonder how concerned he would be if the news had not reported that…

He should have had them involved from the beginning not at the end…

Especially considering his foolish and arrogant “I won” comment over the weekend to Republicans during his trying to convince them to blindly accept his stimulus BULL and then immediate dismissing some of the ideas they proposed without any consideration.

BTW great he won, that does not mean Congress has to agree with him, that is the whole purpose of separation of POWERS, Check and balances to ensure the people are served. The I won statement just shows his ignorance and contempt for our Constitution, the office of Presidentof the United States as well as the People of the United  States.

This is nothing but a pony show and a pathetic attempt to look like a bipartisan effort.

The truth is in the pudding

“I think the president is genuinely serious about this,” Gibbs added.

Gibbs is not absolutely sure that the president is genuinely serious about this, he only thinks that he is… That leaves room for the fact that he is not serious about this… Come on America wake up.

Change You Can Believe In!

President Barack Obama is making good on his promise to hear from Republicans as he pushes for swift passage and bipartisan backing of his massive $825 billion plan intended to jerk the country out of recession.

The unanswered question: whether the new Democratic president will actually listen to GOP concerns about the amount of spending and the tax approach — and modify his proposal accordingly.

With the economy worsening, Obama was making his first trip to Capitol Hill since his swearing-in last week for two private afternoon sessions Tuesday with House and Senate Republicans.

“The goal is to seek their input. He wants to hear their ideas,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said. “If there are good ideas — and I think he assumes there will be — we will look at those ideas.”

“I think the president is genuinely serious about this,” Gibbs added.

The presidential spokesman would not, however, reveal what concessions Obama may be willing to make, if any, to demonstrate his seriousness about working across the aisle and securing GOP support. Gibbs, however, noted that there already are tax provisions in the measure, mostly small business cuts, that are direct GOP suggestions to Obama and his economic team.

“We don’t have pride of authorship. We understand that this is a process of give and take to produce what the president believes is the strongest plan to get the economy going again,” Gibbs said.

Republican leaders sent Obama a letter last week requesting he talk with them about the stimulus. Tuesday’s meetings follow a bipartisan, bicameral White House gathering last week with congressional leaders on the economy.

Under the Obama team’s watchful eye, the Democratic-controlled House and the Senate are in the midst of modifying the package that melds new government spending with a series of tax cuts. It seems to grow with every turn as it wends its way through Congress, and it’s likely to be the largest single piece of legislation ever, once it ends up on Obama’s desk. He wants it ready to sign by mid-February.

As Senate committees prepared to take up the measure and the full House got ready to vote on it this week, the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis that found that Obama’s plan would flow into the economy a little more slowly than he predicted.

At this point, two-thirds of the package consists of new spending on everything from unemployment aid to construction projects while the rest is tax cuts for both individuals and businesses. Republicans are griping that the price tag is too high because of nonessential spending and that the tax provisions are flawed.

Obama’s meetings come as the Federal Reserve examines unconventional ways to lift the economy, and one day after several companies, including Sprint Nextel Corp., Home Depot Inc., and General Motors Corp., announced sweeping job cuts as they seek to remain solvent in an economic environment that worsens by the day amid turmoil in the financial, housing and credit sectors.

Given the gravity of the economic situation, the stimulus measure is widely expected to pass Congress with bipartisan support. The question is just how many Republicans will side with majority Democrats to pass it; House GOP leader John Boehner has said he couldn’t support the measure in its current form and Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell has been noncommittal.

Obama already has had one early victory, persuading Congress to give him the second installment of the $700 billion financial industry bailout money — and that was before he even got into office.

But the stimulus package presents a huge opportunity for the president, who was elected in part by his call for a new-style politics that emphasizes solutions over partisanship to change the way frequently gridlocked Washington works. Getting a significant number of Republicans to back the measure would be a triumph for Obama that would set a bipartisan tone for his presidency and signal that he values Republican ideas — and is willing to give a little to get a little.

For all his courting of Republicans and promises to listen to their ideas, Obama has made clear that it’s his vision that will guide the country.

“I won” the election, he told Republicans on Friday when pressed about his tax policy — a comment both the White House and GOP leaders described as lighthearted, though also matter-of-fact.


via ABC News: Obama to Seek Input From Republicans on Economy.

Obama’s Fear Mongering Tactics – Economy

Hope over fear. Nope, Fear Mongering of the economy.

This is nothing more than trying to scare the American public to throw away more money for government spending and nationalization of our country. 

Please America wake up, our economy has not reached an uprecedented crisis as Obama claims, there are precedents of worse financial situations in our past. This “plan” needs to be carefully examined and reduced to what is needed. Ideas that have been rejected without pause by Obama need to be discussed.

This cannot be rushed through like the TARP bailouts… Urgency must be balanced responsible decision making. Wants vs Needs must be carefully examined and the wants need to be taken out.

This plan must consist of Needs and those needs must be of an advantage to our financial future. 

President Barack Obama, who arguably won a large chunk of political capital in the 2008 election, is now looking to cash in as he urges Congress to pass a massive economic stimulus package.

President Obama is urging Congress to pass a massive economic recovery package by February 16.

But questions about how to spend the money and concerns about the last stimulus package under former President Bush, may create a roadblock.

It’s something the newly minted president is hoping to avoid. But like most things in Washington, cooperation doesn’t come easy.

And that may be why Obama painted an extremely grim portrait of the nation’s economy on Saturday — just hours before he met with his economic team, and days before he meets with Republicans leaders on Capitol Hill.

“We begin this year and this administration in the midst of an unprecedented crisis that calls for unprecedented action,” he said in his weekly radio and Internet address. “Just this week, we saw more people file for unemployment than at any time in the last 26 years, and experts agree that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate could reach double digits.”

Obama pleaded for quick action, warning, “a bad situation could become dramatically worse.”

via Will Obama’s economic plan stimulate bipartisan support? – CNN.com.