Obama, His Spending Face Challenges in Fiscally Responsible, Centrist Democrats
By Mary Kate Cary, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
Some great news for fiscal conservatives this morning: Sen. Evan Bayh announced a coalition of 15 moderate Democratic senators interested in a centrist alternative to Harry Reid's agenda in the Senate. "We are not ideologues. We are pragmatic. We are not strident partisans. We care about our country more than our party," Senator Bayh said on "Morning Joe."
He and his colleagues will be holding a press conference later today, and already they've heard from White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, who asked if he could join them. (The "Morning Joe" crowd joked that the senator should be careful; he may be the recipient of a dead fish this afternoon.)
If the Minnesota senate race ends up going to Al Franken, the Dems will hold 59 seats in the Senate—one vote short of the 60 they need to pass legislation. We saw the influence wielded by moderate Republicans Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, and Susan Collins in the vote on the stimulus bill. Those three Republicans basically called the shots on the final version. Similarly, these 15 moderate Democrats can effectively veto just about any bill coming up: the 2010 budget, the cap-and-trade proposals on the environment, the administration's healthcare reform—and can make a difference in determining whether those moderate Republicans get on board as well. Rahm Emanuel knows they're going to need these centrists to get any part of the president's agenda through the Senate.
The news is just as good in the House. The Boston Herald is reporting that a lot of worried House Democrats are seeking ways to rein in the size of President Obama's budget proposals as well. Congressman Allen Boyd, a Democrat from Florida, heads a similar centrist group, the Blue Dog Democrats, in the House. Boyd says that if all 47 of his Blue Dogs joined the 178 House GOP members, they could deny Nancy Pelosi the 218-vote majority she needs to pass her agenda.
The timing couldn't be better. Hearings on the president's FY 2010 budget begin in Congress the week of March 30. This Friday, the Congressional Budget Office is expected to release a preliminary analysis of the president's massive federal budget, the earmark-filled $410 billion spending bill, and the administration's economic projections—many of which are a lot less optimistic than they were even a few weeks ago. "That's likely to mean a deficit prediction even bigger than the $1.7 trillion fiscal 2009 figure Obama has been using," reports the Herald.
Most people want to get the economy moving without the trillions in debt that the administration is proposing. These centrists in the House and the Senate are the key to achieving some level of fiscal sanity. Great news for folks trying to make ends meet—both around the kitchen table and in the halls of the Capitol.
On Facebook? You can keep up with Thomas Jefferson Street blog postings through Facebook's Networked Blogs.
- Read more by Mary Kate Cary.
- Read more from the Thomas Jefferson Street blog.
- Read more about Sen. Evan Bayh.
Tags: Democrats | economy | politics | Barack Obama | fiscal policy
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (6) | Print
Reader Comments
Stimulate the economy
Someone ask; if someone has a better way to get out this recession, then why have they not presented their plan. Well let me see if you can find fault in my plan versa the big spending plan of the federal government.
We know that a lot of people have money in savings, stocks; IRA’s and yes even under the mattress. So I suggest that the federal and states allow those with money in their tax deferred funds be able to withdraw at least half of those funds to purchase a new vehicle, remodel their home or buy whatever they want without having to pay tax on the amount withdrawn, if the money is spend in one year. This would also pertain to small and large business that wants to renovate or expand their business. Another factor would be for local building permits are suspended where these funds are being spent. I’m sure you get the jest of this idea and it may be improved, however I’m also sure it would stimulate the economy a lot faster then the current government plan.
No clear path yet
FDR's presidency proved we can't spend our way out of recession/depression. If it weren't for the war, the depression would've lasted a lot longer. Reagan's policies, while debt-provoking, not only lifted the economy to new heights, it also buried the Soviet Union.
I have yet to hear of anyone who KNOWS the best plan to get out of this mess. If the centrist's want to keep their heads in the sand hoping a miracle appears on the horizon then they're just as nuts as Pelosi and Reid. They can follow them right over the cliff as far as I'm concerned. I suspect Obama's plan is a partial solution, but something seems to be missing. Granted, getting money into the hands of consumers will jumpstart the economy - IF they begin spending again soon. But getting corporate America onboard is like pulling teeth. Many of them seem more interested in lining their own pockets (see AIG, big banks, et al) then making sure we get out this mess ASAP.
Until there is a feeling that this meltdown will take them down with it unless they act, a sure way out is unlikely or at least likely to be painfully slow and tedious with lots of detours for pork. Stubborn head-in-the-sand attitudes against ALL spending is just as dangerous as the pork-slingers in congress. The paradymes MUST change!!
Mr. R.L. Schaefer
Mr. Schaefer I'm a little disappointed in you, usually when you comment on an article you are articulate and your responses are mature and reasonable(Usually). For this specific response you're sloppy and your response is extremely juvenile. Why the sudden shift? Even when you are usually Making fun of OUR president (not saying I voted for him)you are some what decent.
Again im really disappointed in you.
advertisement
