Brack Obama's trimmed down stimulus package is heading to his desk for signature after making it through both houses of Congress. LV Congressman Charlie Dent will receive no invitation to witness Obama's signing. He voted NO to this economic adrenaline again on Friday. Here's why.“People in the Fifteenth District and across America are hurting in this economy. I strongly believe that government action is necessary to restart our economy and assist those who are struggling, but I don’t believe that the unfocused, inflated spending bill considered by the House today will achieve either of those goals.
“When it comes to legislation I try not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Unfortunately, this bill isn’t all that good. This legislation spends too much on government programs that are not targeted to stimulate economic growth and concentrates too few resources on actual job creation and help for families who have been impacted by our economic downturn.
“Despite early claims the stimulus bill would focus on infrastructure spending to create jobs, only $27.5 billion ($2.5 billion less than the House-passed level) or 3.4 percent of the bill is dedicated to highway, bridge and road projects. By contrast, nearly $200 billion is spent creating 33 new programs totaling $95 billion (30 percent of all appropriations) and expanding 73 existing programs by $92 billion. Many of the programs that are funded in this bill are good programs that I have supported, but I don't believe funding for Census expenses or maintenance at the Smithsonian Institution will stimulate our economy.
“To put this spending into perspective, $789 billion is enough to give every person in Pennsylvania more than $63,000. Under this bill, to create 3 million jobs, we will have spent $262,000 per job. In this one bill, we are spending almost as much as the annual discretionary budget for the entire federal government. And let’s not forget, we will still have a $3 trillion budget to pass, military appropriations for the ongoing conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and other spending measures yet to come before the House.
“Even if this bill creates as many jobs in the immediate as promised, I am seriously concerned about the long-term consequences of the $1.1 trillion price tag ($789 billion plus interest payments of $347 billion). A non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis states that ‘each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollar’s worth of private domestic capital.’ More debt will result in less private investment in our economy and less private investment will undoubtedly result in fewer jobs.
“I would have much preferred a more targeted, timely and temporary job-creation bill. I supported an alternative bill that would have focused on job-creating hard infrastructure projects, while providing individuals, small businesses and manufacturers with targeted tax relief to create jobs. That bill would have cost half of H.R. 1 and created two times the number of jobs.
“I am disappointed with the process by which this legislation was crafted and also considered. This was a thousand-page spending bill that was not available for Members of Congress to read until just a few short hours before the final vote. This bill is the largest spending bill in U.S. history and I believe Congress owed it to the American public to thoroughly review and analyze both the long and short term impact of the legislation.
“Although I did not support passage of this bill, I am committed to working with the President in addressing the many challenges that face our economy and nation.”
87 comments:
Thanks Congressman Dent! No stimulus in this bill.
Bernie,
In an effort to influence Dent's vote one could once again see union dues being used for partisan politcal efforts.
Dent did the right thing here, he voted against a huge government spending bill.Those who signed their name to this legislation should be ashamed, it is nothing more than pork projects.
The public and those who voted for it have no idea exactly what is contained in this bill.
Good jod Democrats, bet you're proud.
Scott Armstrong
Another Republican lemming!
(COD- Lemming-a person who unthinkingly joins a mass movement, especially a headlong rush to destruction.)
"He voted NO to this economic adrenaline again on Friday."
"Economic adrenaline?"
Bawhahahahaha! Says who? What an outstandingly credible description from a discredited lawyer living in a hovel and driving one of the surplus Jeeps from M*A*S*H.
Thanks, for standing athwart the current idiocy, Charlie. If Bernie and his ilk think it's adrenaline, it's probably more like a date rape drug.
How does government control of medical treatment, rather than doctor-patient control, stimulate the economy?
In Oregon they have government control of heath-care, and we've all heard the case where a man needing chemo to live, was offered suicide pills.
Is this going to boost the suicide pills industry? Will they target the elderly first?
We voted him in by a huge margin so why be surprised that he went with his buddies on this one! He is politically safe here as no Dem's can touch him. The bill was loaded with crap along with some things we need to get on with asap. He'll never get to be a senator in this state but he reflects the LV to a tee.
All - the biggest sham in this bill is the loss of the supposed transpaency promised by the new administration. The president, while on the campaign trail, often promised that the public would get a chance to review all the bills prior to being passed, that there wuld be a 48 hour period of learning prior to voting on a bill. The "stimulus" bill was forced into a vote only hours after the i's were dotted and t's were crossed. At, 1,071 pages a lawmaker would have to read 100 pages an hour for 12 straight hours just to get a "once over", let alone trying to fully absorb it. Not a single senator or congressman was able to read the bill, in full, prior to voting. Aneven bigger issue is that the senate and congressional leaders would not even let the bill be read on the floor prior to voting. Why is that? What is being hid in the fine print of this bill - perhaps it wa the $40 million dollars Speaker Pelosi wnated in the bill to save a bird in the SF area (her district), or the $8 Billion set aside to possibly run a rail system from LA to LAs Vegas in 4-5 years. What either of these earmaks do to stimulate the economy right away is unknown to me.
The fact that the dems literally closed the door on the rebublicans during the final re-write is also very disconcerning. The so-called transparency and bi-patisanship had been shielded by a closed door. It's no wonder that every republican and 7 democrats voted against the bil.
Granted, we can all agree the final Bush years had many, many issues. But, to see such a one-sided vote (by both sides) on such an important issue may be a bigger problem than any George Bush ever created. If one party continues to make all the rules going forward we will be in for more dark and dismal times.
I congratulate and thank Charlie Dent for siding with the people on this vote. At the same time Arlen Spector should be ashamed - I guarantee we will find a piece of pork in this bill with Spector's name on it.
Dent was in lock step with Bush and his leadership. The blind loyalty that Dent showed has led us into this ditch. Now, that the Democrats are trying to tow us out of the ditch Dent tries to impede their progress. It is about creating jobs Congressman. Jobs for your constituents who are losing their jobs and their homes. As for Dent's political safety, he has been lucky. He has drawn third and fourth tier candidates in the past. He is far from safe. If Morganelli ever wakes up and decides he'd like to see what life was like for Fred B. you are toast Charlie. If Boscola wakes up one morning, and decides the PA Senate is no longer for her, you are toast Charlie. If Cunningham ever gives up his for now quixotic quest for Governor, and realizes Washington is his play, you will be on the unemployment line Charlie. Even second tier candidates like Callahan or Jen Mann would come close to send you packing. So keep voting with your Wall Street Pals that got us into this mess Charlie.
To criticize Arlen Specter for being a pragmatist in making sure Pennsylvania gets its turn at this government trough is a misdirected and misguided. The name of the game in politics is quid pro quo and Charlie Dent should be run out of the state on rail for not thinking of his constituents first! There will be a lot of money being thrown around on this recovery and why shouldn’t the Lehigh valley get its share of jobs!
Anon9:02 - Are you even remotely aware that Charlie Dent has one of the most moderate voting records in congress? Lock step? I think not. Next time, do some research on voting records prior to posting.
Fly on the wall - gimme, gimme, gimme. The problem is not everything has to be about entitlements.
Stop expecting hand-outs and freebies.
Obama had the same victory margin in the 15th District as Dent: 58%. Do the math, Charlie: lots of your votes came from your constituents who voted for Obama and want him (and us) to succeed. If Dent continues to lock arms with the other wingnut fanatics left in office in his party, those L.V. Obama voters will turn on him and vote for any credible opponent. Perhaps Dent realizes that -- unlike any campaign I can remember -- the L.V. Obama campaign volunteers are still meeting and active politically: a bunch of them demonstrated outside his office on Thursday. How many are there ? About a hundred are meeting monthly, with a volunteer list of several hundred. Yo, Charlie: sounds like a made-to-order campaign for your 2010 opponent, don't it ? :-)
(Note to "Anonymous": why should we care what you say if you won't say your name ?
I really hope this stimulus succeeds. People seem like they're dying to rip apart Obama for anything. He proposes a stimulus and people start drooling at the mouth to rip him apart. How many people on here have read this stimulus? If your a republican, does your information come from republican sources? Same to the democrats. If that's the case you just don't know. People keep citing specifics about the bill. Please provide us with a link or reference as to where this information is coming from.
For instance, anon 8:37 states, "How does government control of medical treatment, rather than doctor-patient control, stimulate the economy?" Now are you referencing what McCaughey said on Fox News and that CNN eventually ran? Do you realize that she misquoted what the bill? I'm just asking that before people start making accusations they provide a source for their information.
By the way I got my info about the medical quote from here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/13/press-ably-picking-apart_n_166707.html
Yea its a liberal website and a liberal man debunking the claims but still, I provided my information.
I hope all of the projects funded through this bill that come to the district are accompanied by a big note that says, "not approved by Charlie Dent". If he attempts to claim credit for anything, he should be called to task. Vote against the bill, no political credit. Seems fair.
Are you willing to do that Bernie?
Anonymous said... [8:53 AM] All - the biggest sham in this bill is the loss of the supposed transpaency promised by the new administration. The president, while on the campaign trail, often promised that the public would get a chance to review all the bills prior to being passed, that there wuld be a 48 hour period of learning prior to voting on a bill.
Well Obama actually is not a dictator and cannot dictate what Congress does. He can only be responsible for what his actions are. The bill was consummated Friday night in the Senate. The Whitehouse has the entire package +notes on it's site. That is where Obama lives and is in Illinois till Monday when he presumably will sign the bill. That indeed is beyond the 48 hours within his ability to control the timeline for review.
That said- Whether for or against this package, one thing is for sure. Somebody's going to tank big time. If this succeeds the Republicans will be mortally wounded. If it fails in 2010 the Democrats will be history. Since the line was drawn in the sand with absoluteness- One party will win and the other will lose... BIG TIME!
This could be the biggest change in history since the evolution of a 2 party system. I'm not too sure if that's a good thing for America's future.
Glenn
The 48 hr timeline was not a waiting period to SIGN the bill, the 48 hrs was supposed to be a period before bills were VOTED on. I agree that Obama is not a dictator, however, he is supposedly the head of his party. Unfortunatley, and I think you probably realize this to be true, Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid will rarely listen to anyone else - ncluding Obama. There's a 3 way power struggle going n right now, and unfortunately yeh prez seems to be on the losing end. Personally, I believe Obama needs to take control of his party. He needs to move more to the center - which is what he campaigned on. Moving to the left will only made the lines of division that we're seeing now run deeper. I truly hope that doesn't happen.
I am sure as details emerge, there will be some ludicrous “pork” held up as examples to rail against the bill. That’s part of the process, like it or not. And Glenn may be correct, that with such a polarized vote, one party will benefit, and the other will not. Or will it? This is but ONE bill. Joe Public finds it mind-boggling how the trillions are adding up, whether its Paulson/Bush’s TARP, or Obama’s stimulus, or the future “banking”, the future “mortgage”, the future “fill in the blank” bail out.
I think the most damnable line in Dent’s letter was this: “Under this bill, to create 3 million jobs, we will have spent $262,000 per job.” THAT, is the sad pattern, Democratic or Republican, of government solutions.
Final thought, since so many references seem to be made to the “Great Depression”: when FDR stopped spending out of concern for the debt, unemployment rates began to rise again. So the spending did not stimulate true recovery, but provided relief and showed the government “doing something.”
Wall Street Pals" you mean like Robert Ruben? Get real.
It's time for Democrats to move past talking points and start engaging some critical analysis of the situation. Republicans are starting to clean house, from top to bottom, perhaps the Democrats might want to consider the idea of expecting more from their elected officials than demonstrations of total control.
Scott Armstrong
Retired ASD teacher here. Yes, the REAL one.
I am neither Republican nor Democrat, but I congratulate Charlie Dent for voting "NO."
Not only do I agree the bill that was just passed has very little to do with job creation, something to do with changing the Constitution, and a little too much "catching-up" on the part of the liberal party but, I believe persons are elected to serve their constituency.
Somewhere, Charlie stated that his phone calls and other contacts were running 5-1 AGAINST the current version of the bill.
He listened.
A Democrat poster asked “How many people on here have read this stimulus?”
I haven’t read it, how could anyone read it, it wasn’t released until mere hours before the vote. What is serious is that the people charged to vote this larder in law didn’t read it either.
Yes, I get a lot of my information on this from Rush and other “right wing sources,” at least they are giving details. What details are the major news networks giving on this package? From what I see they are continuing to fill the role of mere cheerleaders for the new administration. It is shameful.
Understand this, to be a conservative is to live in an adverse environment. The liberal perspective permeates our existence. We are constantly confronted with opposing points of view. Conversely it is easy to be a liberal. They can rest in an intellectual cocoon of constant re-enforcement.
Scott Armstrong
Retired ASD teacher here. Yes, the REAL one.
Scott, assuming your are the real Scott (just kidding), what troubles me most about the passage of this bill, is in the sense of urgency it was done.
This is a bill representing an ENORMOUS amount of spending, highly complex (1100 pages), and our representatives were given less than 48 hours to analyze it?
This whole episode was "used car salesman" in appearance and execution. That's scary.
At least it's now quite clear what dealership it was.
Yes, this bill and all the resulting problems can be laid squarely at the feet of the Democrat Party. What is being portrayed as a big victory for Obama will in time be more correctly viewed as a Republican/conservative victory.
Scott Armstrong
It's the most partisan spending bill in US history. No transparency. Lots of backroom dealing on a plan recommended by a stunning roster of connected insiders and demonstrated tax cheats. It's a spending orgy with a 30% increase using money everybody knows is not there. This is not stimulus. It's short-sighted payback politics and alarming generational theft by the coveting crowd. Demanding your share of the handout is all the rage - and a very natural fit for many. Give a man a fish and he'll eat today. Remember Obama's weeping wing nut who was certain she'd not have to worry about her mortgage, gas and groceries? Shouldn't be a problem, right?
The initial house bill:
SPENDING ($612.705 billion)
Aid to the poor and unemployed - $43 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through Dec. 31, increase them by $25 a week and provide job training; $20 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 13 percent; $4 billion to provide a one-time additional Supplemental Security Income payment; $2.5 billion in temporary welfare payments; $1 billion for home heating subsidies; and $1 billion for community action agencies. ($71.5 billion)
Health care - $40 billion to subsidize health care insurance for the unemployed under the COBRA program or provide health care through Medicaid; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $20 billion to modernize health information technology systems; $4 billion for preventative care; $1.5 billion for community health centers; $420 million to combat avian flu; $335 million for programs that combat AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis. ($153.255 billion)
Infrastructure - $43 billion for transportation projects, including $30 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $12 billion for mass transit, including $7.5 billion to buy transit equipment like buses; $31 billion to build and repair federal buildings and other public infrastructure; $19 billion in water projects; $10 billion in rail and mass transit projects. ($152.5 billion)
Education - $41 billion in grants to local school districts; $79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cuts in state aid; $21 billion for school modernization; $16 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $500 to $5,350; $2 billion for Head Start.
Energy - $32 billion to fund a so-called "smart electricity grid" to reduce waste; $6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes. ($197 billion)
Science and technology - $10 billion for science facilities; $6 billion to bring high-speed Internet access to rural and underserved areas; $1 billion for the 2010 Census. ($17 billion)
Housing - $13 billion to repair and make more energy-efficient public housing projects, allow communities to buy and repair foreclosed homes, and help the homeless. ($13 billion)
Environment - $3.2 billion to clean up Superfund and waste sites, leaking underground storage tanks, nuclear sites and military bases, as well as $400 million for habitat restoration projects and $850 million to prevent forest fires. ($4.45 billion)
Law enforcement - $4 billion in grants to state and local law enforcement to hire officers and purchase equipment. ($4 billion)
TAXES ($260.7 billion)
Individuals ($180.9 billion)
$500 per-worker, $1,000 per-couple tax cut for two years, costing about $145 billion. Workers could expect to see about $20 a week less withheld from their paychecks starting in June. Millions of Americans who don't make enough money to pay federal income taxes could file returns next year and receive checks. ($145 billion)
Greater access to the $1,000 per-child tax credit for the working poor in 2009 and 2010, at a cost of $18.3 billion. Under current law, workers must make at least $8,500 to receive the credit. The change eliminates the floor, meaning more workers who pay no federal income taxes could receive checks. ($18.3 billion)
Increase the earned-income tax credit - which provides money to the working poor - for families with at least three children, at a cost of $4.7 billion. ($4.7 billion)
Provide a $2,500 tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010, at a cost of $10.3 billion. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000. ($10.3 billion)
Repeal a requirement that a $7,500 first-time homebuyer tax credit be paid back over time for homes purchased from Jan. 1 to July 1, unless the home is sold within three years, at a cost of $2.6 billion. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $150,000. ($2.6 billion)
Businesses ($79.8 billion)
Extend a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up the depreciation of that equipment through 2009, at a cost of $5 billion. ($5 billion)
Provide an infusion of cash into money-losing companies by allowing them to claim tax credits on past profits dating back five years instead of two, at a cost of $15 billion. ($15 billion)
Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years. ($7 billion)
Subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, teacher training, economic development and infrastructure improvements, at a cost of $35.5 billion. ($35.5 billion)
Extend tax credits for renewable energy production, at a cost of $13 billion. ($13 billion)
Extend and increase tax credits to homeowners who make their homes more energy efficient, at a cost of $4.3 billion. Homeowners could receive tax credits of up to $1,500 for upgrading furnaces and hot water heaters and making other improvements through 2010 ($4.3 billion)
As best I can tell, it looked good to me. It's about $100 billion less now, which is a shame. Spending stimulates the economy much better than tax cuts. Everytime we've went with small government and tax cuts, we end up with a stock market crash and a recession. Scott Armstrong and the rest of the yahoos supporting Dent on this want to try tired old, failed solutions, and essentially march down the road to depression. Armstrong and the rest essentially think all government spending and action is bad, and it's all "pork." "Pork" built your roads, schools, hospitals, and essential services.
Spending is good, spending will succeed in bringing back our economy, spending created the boom of the mid-1900's. Tax cuts gave us the stock market crashes of 1929, 1987, and 2008. Charlie and his party gave away the house to his wall street pals for years, in the forms of deregulation, tax cuts to the top one percent, and loopholes to give away high paying jobs. Scott Armstrong and his ilk believe these things stimulate the economy. History says otherwise. Your party voted to do nothing, they voted for failure, they voted for people to suffer. It's a new low.
I think Mr dent is very shortsighted with his staement in the census.
I'm unemployed, and I took the census test, would Mr Dent rather I have no job and collect welfare?
Not to mention the Census may uncover just how many people are jobless (beyond the numbers that ONLY count folks collecting unemployment to help keep the numbers low.)
And it may help us understand just how many folks have lost home ownership of late. (Plenty sold houses and rent and were not forclosed as well.)
But I don't want to hear any GOP talk like PORK is new. We had 6 years of Pork from 2000-2006!
Blackwater was a pork item!
In closing, Scott and other GOP'ers, your ideas were put to the test the last 8 years. They didn't work. In fact, supply side has never worked. While people today give Reagan high marks, 20 years later, back in the 1990-92 era, his numbers were down, because his policies had lead us into Bush's recession. Let go of your tired ideas, embrace reality, and re-join America. We do need Republicans involved in this recovery, as watchdogs, but if they are just going to say no to everything, it is best if the President ceases to reach out to them.
Rich Wilkins
and fast note Sean Hannitty's claim of Frisby Golf courses is BULL! Go to
cspan.org and follow the links to the bill. You will not see FOLF there. Not even in the summer of George!
anon (ASD teacher) 11:08
You mean like the "urgency" with the Patriot act?
That had last minute amendments and was pushed through with little time to read.
Because I think then the "talking point" turd blossom aka Rove put out was if we delay the terrorist win!
Adam Smith wrote the “Wealth of Nations” in the 18th century, around the same time as Thomas Paine rallied American’s not only against the king but from the general oppression of government. This is the “ilk” I stand by.
The more government is allowed to expand the more liberty recedes.
If the contents of this bill were so pretty/just the Democrats/media would have proudly put them on display. The rush to pass this bill was an invention to keep the lid on the contents. I can prove this by the mere fact that Obama won’t sign it till Monday, that is a full three days after the rushed senate vote.
Not all of us are willing to wear the blinders
Scott Armstrong
Sad thing is that the Dems in the 15th will run Sam Bennett again against Charlie in 2010 -- she has already just about declared on various so-called progressive blogs -- and she will, once again, lose big.
He knows it, so he votes any way he wants because the voters let him get away with it by continually selecting bad candidates like Bennett to run against him.
This is definitely a case of getting the kind of representation that you deserve.
I agree with J. Spike Rogan in his one comment, “But I don't want to hear any GOP talk like PORK is new. We had 6 years of Pork from 2000-2006!” It hasn’t really mattered who had control of the pig farm, has it?
That said, I disagree with the general statement of Anon 12:28, “Spending is good, spending will succeed in bringing back our economy”. The government spending money it does not have without borrowing has never been a long term fix. When FDR stopped spending, unemployment went up. All the New Deal spending did not bring back the economy, it simply provided relief, and probably stemmed more radical ideologies from gaining ground. And the Great Society spending was one of the contributing factors to the stagflation of the 70s. Spending alone does not fix anything. If you are going to spend the kind of borrowed money this bill does to create 3 million jobs, I think you’d be better off cutting a check for the equivalent $262,000 to the lowest 3 million households and let them create the demand, if all it takes is “spending (to) succeed in bringing back our economy.”
But, neither does unfettered free trade, and tax cuts without matched spending cuts, that has been the neo-con mantra since the 1980s. Greedy corporate CEOs, and their political accomplices are just as much to blame for this as “liberals”. My wrath cuts both ways.
I had no idea this blog would evoke so many interesting and spirited comments, especially on a Saturday. After reading them, I'm more confused than ever.
1) I have not read the bill. No one commenting here read the bill No one who votedf for or against the bill, read the bill. It was not available until about 8 hours before the vote. Obama promised more transparecy than this. If someone voted against a bill because he was given no opportunity to read or revirew it, I won't fault him. I am very disturbed by the lack of transparency. Republicans are right to note this. Scott and Retired ASD Teacher both are concerned about the rush, and rightly so.
2) We need to do something. We are in an emergencey and teetering in the direction of another Great Depression. With all its flawes, this bill does address that problem. It will produce or return 4 million jobs. For that reason, I would vote for it even without the time to read all of it. As much as I hate the lack of transparency, I have no reason to think anyone is trying to trick me. But this cannot be the norm. I understand Specter's vote and would have voted as he did.
3) I would work hard to reduce the amount of pork after the fact. As I understand it, there will need to be several bills. So I don't think the battle against pork is over.
4) Government is not controlling medical treatment, but is trying to reduce the amount of paperwork to make it cheaper. I have heard Congressman Dent speak favorably of this sort of thing when he has discussed our health insurance costs. I don't understand the fear here. Maybe I'm wrong.
5) Bryan, one of the youngest contributors here, has a very thoughtful comment. The vote is over and I'm sure we all want this bill to succeed.
6) Charlie Dent did, as Retired ASD Teacher reports, hear his voters express reservations. That was noted during a Charlie Dent town hall, reported in one of the papers.
7) Rich Wilkin is right. Reagan, great leader that he was, did not have the answer to economic woes.
I appreciate ALL the views here because I admit I am still hopelessly confused. I will NOT criticize Specter for supporting the bill, which is probably what I would have done. On the other hand, I respect Charlie's NO vote. This is a lot of money.
Scott Armstrong: "If the contents of this bill were so pretty/just the Democrats/media would have proudly put them on display. The rush to pass this bill was an invention to keep the lid on the contents. I can prove this by the mere fact that Obama won’t sign it till Monday, that is a full three days after the rushed senate vote."
-----
For God's sake!... what do you want him to do? He wanted it posted at the Whitehouse website for at least 48 hours and solicits email. So he's damned for not posting 48 hours before he signs it into law and slammed for not signing it before that 48 hours. (Congress he can't control when they do their voting)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/arra_public_review/
If you want to "PROVE" anything.. please be specific based on the posted bill itself. I'm not arguing for or against, but condemnation w/o knowing what your referring to, I cannot do the research. I'm not defending, but fair is fair.
Dent also voted against women, when he said no to the Lily Ledbetter Act, which equalizes pay for women as men receive. The women of the Lehigh Valley thank you for showing how anti-feminine you are Charley. Dent is against Labor also, as he is against the Employee Free Choice Act. He will be at the Hotel Bethlehem this Thursday the 19th at noon to work with the Lehigh Valley Chamber of Commerce and the law firm of Talman, Hudders and Sorentino (Anti Union busting law firm). Come out to the Hotel Bethlehem from 11:15 until the event ends at 1:30 for informational picketing. Let Charley know what the working people of the Lehigh Valley think of his, “ahem” “moderate stance”. This is the same guy who was in “LOCKSTEP WITH BUSH” when it came to spending money on the recovery of Iran, but will not vote for recovery in his own country. Does this mean he is leaning more to being a “TRAITOR” to his own country, or is this his definition of the word, “moderate”?
Let's stick to the stimulus package. That's complicated enough. I promise you'll have plenty of opportunities to criticize Dent's various positions in subsequent posts, but the economy is complicated enough. You are concerned about the economy, aren't you?
"Something needs to be done."
Stated as if something can be done. This is the kind of naivete that leads to legislation like Smoot-Hawley. It seems counter intuitive by today's thinking to recommend doing nothing. But each step in the recent unprecedented rash of governmental action has worsened the economy. Our babbling tax cheat retard of a Sec'y Treasury further collapses the market with every sentence he stammeringly butchers. Let us not act simply for the sake of acting. Don't just do something. Stand there!
Heh. Heh. There's a true "laissez faire" conservative.
You see, we've tried that - standing there. Hasn't worked. We've tried tax cuts - haven't worked. We've tried rebates to taxpayers - haven't worked.
In Ireland, when people were starving in droves, England felt it would be sending the wrong message if it helped out. So it did nothing and people died.
With all due respect for your philosophy, which is a good one, we need to try something different.
Retired ASD teacher here.
Bernie, it's obvious to me, and I hope everyone else who has a sense of honesty, this was a HUSTLE.
The speed of this passage MIGHT be justified. Time will tell.
For me, I HOPE we are moving in the right direction. Unfortunately the current movement, so far, does NOT match my own plan of action for this country.
That's all. Can you accept that, Spike?
"Aneven bigger issue is that the senate and congressional leaders would not even let the bill be read on the floor prior to voting. Why is that?"
Anon 8:53,
If they'd read the bill on the floor, we probably wouldn't have a vote for a few more days. 1071 pages would take a long time to read aloud!
That said, I agree with Charlie's "no" vote. This issue needed more transparency, more thought and deliberation, and probably a lot fewer programs, most of which can probably be accurately labeled "pork." (I say "probably" because I haven't read it either.)
“For God's sake!... what do you want him to do? He wanted it posted at the Whitehouse website for at least 48 hours and solicits email. So he's damned for not posting 48 hours before he signs it into law and slammed for not signing it before that 48 hours. (Congress he can't control when they do their voting)’
The bill, by his own words, should have posted for 48 hours before any vote. I ask rhetorically, why didn’t that happen? The answer to that will be evident soon enough.
The folly of this will also become evident as time rolls on. By the way, there would be fewer objections to much of this legislation if it was more honestly labeled and incorporated into the annual federal budget as what it really is, increased spending.
Scott Armstrong
Actually Bernie, I did read it. Read the conference report too. It's a tough read, but you could get through it. Anyone can, all they have to do is contact their congressman or senator and ask. It's a good bill. Spending is exactly what we need right now.
As another poster said Scott, he'd be damned if he signed it today for not giving 48 hours. He's damned for signing Monday because you will say he's proving it wasn't that urgent. Tell the more than one million people who have lost their jobs in the last 3 months that there is no need to rush this. The party who is crowing about budgets and pork passed a $1.35 trillion give away in 2001, with some complicit Dems on board. You've wasted billions in Iraq, because you said there were WMD. Your President Bush oversaw the largest deficit spending binge in world history. Your Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson basically lost $350 billion, and has no idea where it is. You complain of bills being rushed through, but probably support the obscene Patriot Act. You say you are of the 'ilk' of Payne, but the truth is, you are in the ilk of Hoover. Your ideas have been tried, and they have failed. It's time to abandon the language of Reagan's economy, and return to the principles that created the middle class.
Whoever the poster is that says we may re-run Bennett, I hope you are wrong, but I've been disappointed before.
Retired ASD teacher here.
Rising Sun, you actually read the entire bill? Wow! You are one of a select few in this great country of ours. Too bad your are anonymous in this posting. I would like to shake your hand!
Folks, no one is talking about what got us here in the first place and why doing more of the same is nuts. Remeber Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac and those other lousy mortgages?? We undermine our economy with "hand-out" spending (NOT the military spending), and now want to do more of the same to fix it. The cure is worse than the disease. Some bit of this bill may do something to help, but Obama & Co. better hope that it's enough to cover the ongoing onslaught we'll have to deal with as a result of the SAME bill.
ASD,
The first page of the electronic copy of the bill is an executive notes type of set up, which essentially tells you everything you need to know about it, but go ahead and read through if you'd like. By the time I got through page one, I was for it. I am far from anonymous. My name's on here, read up.
Lady Rep,
While Fannie and Freddie did not help, they are simply one small, small part of our problems. Our problems are of a paralysis of the consumer market. Middle class folks are not spending. Part of this is the housing bubble. More of this is the loss in real wages over the last 30 years, the loss of high paying jobs and union wages in several sectors, the spike we experienced in oil prices after the Cheney energy task force, the scaling back of consumer and middle class protections under Bush, and the de-regulatory rush conservatives pushed through in the last few years.
"Hand out" spending? You mean like building rail between LA and Las Vegas? Like building roads? Like buying energy efficient cars? You're speaking in the non-sensical Reagan-era economic jargon that has failed. Spending gave us a middle class, because government spending, when done well, yields huge dividends to the public, in the form of jobs, infrastructure, and opportunity. "Small government" eras always seem to end in recession. The military spending you defend is some of the least stimulative spending we do, unless we do it on World War II levels.
Retired ASD teacher here.
Well, Rising Sun, if ONE (1) page can accurately explain what is written on the other 1099 pages, I sure am impressed and would like to read that page you refer to.
Can you provide a link?
Rising Sun, I don't know about you, but I don't want one more hand touching my dollars than is necessary. Fix some roads that need it, maybe, but I have no desire to pay for a rail line between LA and Las Vegas. If I want one in my own backyard, let's stimulate business in PA, generate REAL revenue here, have them pay a reasonable tax rate and pay for it ourselves!
I must say that I am truly impressed with the speed reading ability of some.
Anyway, link to the "Public Print" on Thomas
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:7:./temp/~c111nwWW4f::
and link to conference report
http://www.rules.house.gov/bills_details.aspx?NewsID=4149
Glad Dent is voting like a typical Republican hack. It will make it that much easier to beat him, when the Democrats post a credible candidate. Additionally, you hear two things all the time which are not true. The first is that Charlie is a nice guy. He is not a nice guy. He is the most vicious and negative campaigner in the Lehigh Valley. Two, that he is a moderate. Moderates don't vote against equal pay for women !
What we have here, and what we have always had since the '30's, is people, typified by Spike, who hate success because they are not successful. They managed, because Bush was such a loser, to take control in this past election.
How in the world do you think real sustainable career-type jobs get created? Not by the government. And when that bridge is fianally built in 2014 or whenever, that job will be gone.
If creative and ambitous people have ideas that lead to jobs- taxing the earnings they might use to create jobs is the wrong answer
You know what cracks me up? The Republicans bitching about the speed at which this bill was put together. You told us to shut when it was the Democrats sounding off about the USA PATRIOT Act. You didn't mind shoving that up the asses of the American people. Get in line, watch what you say in a time of war, the President needs leeway to protect our freedoms... Isn't that what you said?
Well, wasting money is a far cry from pissing away our constitutional rights. I'd rather go broke than have the travesty that is the PATRIOT Act.
Dent shit in his mess kit on this one. He can claim a 5-1 ratio on phone calls as his rational. But that's disingenuous on his part. He didn't listen when the ratio was the same on legislation that mattered to Democrats in this valley. But that was when his Republican masters were in charge. What's his excuse this time?
Take a big bite Charlie. Get used to the taste. What are you going to say when the Valley gets screwed out of Federal money because of the way you voted. You need to go. This shoe fits pal, wear it.
"I had no idea this blog would evoke so many interesting and spirited comments, especially on a Saturday."
Why shure ya did BernieO, you posted 95% of these comments your own self!
Where's (wink wink) "KathyD"? Baking you a Valentine's cake?
The really frightening part of this whole issue is that ALL but 7 Democrats voted "YES" on a bill they had not had time to read; all the the Democrat Senators (and 3 Republlicans) followed suit. It is the single largest spending bill in the history of this country, and they were not willing to say "wait a minute, lets see what we are voting on". Obama insisted that it had to be done quickly, I must wonder why, per haps so that we do not know what is hidden in there until it is too late.
I also have seen many other things going on unoticed in the shadow of this debate...like a bill for gun registration, as just one example.
It is all very discomforting and we may all be paying a higher price than we realize for their haste to fall in line with the wishes of the Democrat leadership.
Retired ASD teacher here.
I can't get either link to work. Oh, well.
ASD Teacher,
No, not for what I had. I'll provide you with some similar ones though:
http://appropriations.house.gov/pdf/PressSummary02-12-09.pdf
And here on C-Span is everything you need:
http://www.c-span.org/
Lady Rep,
No, I do want them building mass transit, I do want them spending on roads, rails, schools, more energy efficient operations, health care, and most of the things in this bill. Doing it at the state level is extremely costly to taxpayers, because we have balanced budget amendments in both states. I'd much rather us share the cost nationally and be able to address these needs. The way to get these projects done locally is to have a Congressman who votes for and pushes for projects here. We don't have that.
Anon 4:58,
Right, right, your version of laissez faire the GOP espouses only failed under Bush II. Not under Reagan/Bush I and Hoover, right? You're not entitled to your own facts, you only have the facts.
Retired ASD teacher here.
I don't know, Rising Sun, the first link you provided talks about 311 billion dollars. I'm more interested in the other 500 billion, the major part of this bill.
The second link was not nearly specific enough for me either.
Guess I'll need to wait for the Morning Call to lay all of this out for me in an unbiased way. Thanks.
Hmmmm. Balanced budget, Rising Sun? There's a thought. When will you admit that BOTH parties have played fast and loose with our money, but the Republicans are pikers compared to when a Democrat gets their hand on it? Ask Barney Frank who is NOW the champion of the little people. Rumor has it that there is a gun registration provision, neighborhood group funding (oooh, ACORN), I still don't want to pay for people to get from one pretty self-absorbed city to another,and the health records online issue which, on the surface is a good thing, but just like the census, is heading for government/White House intrusion because it's been set-up by bad language in the original bill and now this one. Please, confirm this for me. This is all that I have had time to read.
My favoriet irony is that it had to be passed before the weekend, but I don't see Obama running to sign it. Photo op for President's Day. How nice.
"Guess I'll need to wait for the Morning Call to lay all of this out for me in an unbiased way."
I'm getting my information from a more reliable source - The Enquirer. Theyt'll get to the bottom of this story.
"My favoriet irony is that it had to be passed before the weekend, but I don't see Obama running to sign it."
Lady Rep, Damn, your're good. But it's unfair to use logic and shit like that when arguing with us. If you don't stop,. I'm going to start crying on my little pillow.
Before I do that, I thought I'd let you know I read a news account explaining that, even though the vote was conducted Friday, the earliest it can be processed and ready for presidential signature is Monday. I no longer have the link, but will try to find it.
"BernieO, you posted 95% of these comments your own self!
Where's (wink wink) "KathyD"? Baking you a Valentine's cake?"
Shit, that bastard AJ was right. The Villas are spending their Valentine's Day with me. I'm very flattered.
"The really frightening part of this whole issue is that ALL but 7 Democrats voted "YES" on a bill they had not had time to read;"
That's what bothers me most, too. That's a very fair criticism. I don't know why we could not wait 48 hours.
You know, all of this would be moot if we could get the government peeps to pay all of their back taxes!
"Additionally, you hear two things all the time which are not true. The first is that Charlie is a nice guy. He is not a nice guy. He is the most vicious and negative campaigner in the Lehigh Valley. Two, that he is a moderate. Moderates don't vote against equal pay for women !"
The only person I've read making this claim is former congressional candidate Sam Bennett. If this is you, Sam, why not come out and tell us?
I support the stimulus but reject your slams at Dent.
1) Dent ran on Bennett's record. He could have rolled around in the mud, but chose to stick to Bennett's own record, whether it is POM or her own botched financial disclosures or her debate gaffes. He certainly ran a negative campaign, but it was not personal. He would not do that.
2) Bennett is part of the center. He has been rated consistently as such in CQ and National Journal, both of which are unbiased sources. His philosophy is to govern from the middle. Some people may reject that philosophy, and that's fine. But that is Dent.
Oh, wow! Lady Rep was behind the line on that one. She's on fire!
That's a three pointer! Count it!
Good one!
I'm waiting for her to foul out.
You will be interested to know that Arlen Specter is painted as somekind of hero in today's Washington Post. The Post claims that he voted "Yes" for this package because he was able to wheel a deal where so many BILLIONS go to the sciences, especially The National Institutes of Health out of this plan. We here in DC were under the impression that the institutes were getting this money irregardlessly. It is amazing how spin can be put on such transparent things.
But hey, I live (as a student) where the people in this District previously voted Marion Barry to another term as their mayor. And now he currently serves as District Council Person. ~~Alex
I was raised by Jesuits. If I foul, they'll get me.
When I walk around Georgetown, I get confused for a Jesuit, all the time. But I discreetly point out that I am wearing a clerical collar.
(It's a bad priest joke. Please don't throw rotten tomatoes.)
I will pray for you, and you'll hopefully pray that my jokes get better.
Peace be with you, ~~Alex
Hey Pelosi and Obama:
48 hours for Americans to see it
5 days between passing and signing
LYING SACKS OF ----, THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE PROVEN YOURSELVES TO BE
How on Earth can anybody possible defend this monstrosity, even hiding behind 'build more schools' and other such things.
The deceit and dishonesty of Obama should be plain and clear. I hope everyone who voted for him is EXCEPTIONALLY PROUD OF THEMSELVES.
He is a scumbag. His record warned us of such, but no one wanted to listen. Even now, nobody wants to hear it. He is on an agenda, folks.
Chicago radical street thug. That does not come from talk radio. That is MY opinion and it comes from Obama's own history and actions. He is a showboating liar. Has been since day one. Ooops, that's racist talk.
Tough, too bad.
Pollitical point! Please pay attention.
Congressman Charlie Dent -- final vote count -- Election 2008 (15th Congressional District Pennsylvania) = 181,386
United States President Barack Obama -- final vote count -- Election 2008 (15th Congressional District Pennsylvania) = 180,123
Barack Obama won his race by 56 to 44 in the 15th District.
Charlie Dent won his race by nearly 59 to 41 in his District.
Spare us all the threats about the Obamunist Party and the danger it represents to Dent because he voted correctly against the Democrats yelling fire while blocking the exits.
Maybe the President should realize that in a swing district like the Lehigh Valley one of his Progressive parrots got herself trounced by over 50,000 votes and consider that in his approach to governing.
Something tells me that Charlie Dent is not shaking in his boots.
BTW Liberals,
If Republicans are such evil bad guys for marching in lock step, how do you explain what was it, seven House of Reps Dems voting against this piece of JUNK?
I am still waiting for a valid explanation of why the public could not see ALL of it prior to the vote?
Why the deceit?
Don't give us George Bush this and that. He is history. Obama is in charge now. So what's up with Obamessiah and used car salesman pressure to get bill signed?
USED CAR SALESMAN PRESSUE
You guys have to be so proud. You should have a big national celebration! In George Bush's honor!
I will always be a registered Democrat and I will always have a hard time respecting someone who voted for Obama and his used car salesman crap. He campaigned on it.
I could care less how unpopular that opinion is.
Justify Obama when you look in the mirror. I can justify bad mouthing him.
"Maybe the President should realize that in a swing district like the Lehigh Valley one of his Progressive parrots got herself trounced by over 50,000 votes and consider that in his approach to governing."
I think the President does realize that and it explains why he has reached out to our Congressman on three separate occasions during his short tenure in office. I consider that a very good sign for our district and our country. They are both pragmatists.
"I think the President does realize that and it explains why he has reached out to our Congressman on three separate occasions during his short tenure in office."
To a certain extent, I agree with you. But there's a difference between reaching out to convince and reaching out to work together. If you and I are unalterably opposed on an issue and we meet together for lunch -- all we're going to share is a meal -- not a plan for laying a foundation of compromise.
Consider this, it would actually have been cheaper for the Congress to have given $10 billion to every state in the Union so that the states could use the money in ways that would best benefit their people.
And, I am so very tired of hearing about how "it's better to do something than nothing."
When the engines failed on that plane that ditched in the Hudson, the heroes in the cockpit didn't just start pushing random flight control buttons when they saw they were in trouble.
The cockpit recorder actually captured them running through their flight emergency manuals in a calm manner. It wasn't, "Hey! Captain, we're crashing! Mash your fist down on the instrument panel! Maybe that will save us!"
The Congress was discussing increasing the debt on the back of every American family by over $10,000.
You know what? Let's debate it for a month. Let's not make people have to guess about what actually is or isn't in the bill.
That's not too much to ask for.
Another poster referenced a used car salesman in his entry. Who reading this blog goes on to a used car lot and signs off on the first price they're given? You wouldn't do that for an $8,000 used car -- but somehow it's okay that the Democrats in Congress just did the same thing (save for seven, god love 'em) for $1 TRILLION!
Umm. H-E-L-L N-O!
Bernie, I will always love ya, but Anonymous 8:43 is my valentine.
Bingo!
thank god Brad Osborne of South Whitehall is going to run for Lehigh County Executive this year
"Before I do that, I thought I'd let you know I read a news account explaining that, even though the vote was conducted Friday, the earliest it can be processed and ready for presidential signature is Monday. I no longer have the link, but will try to find it."
Then again, what was the rush Friday?
Scott Armstrong
"In Ireland, when people were starving in droves, England felt it would be sending the wrong message if it helped out. So it did nothing and people died."
Associating Victoria's murderous malfeasance with laissez-faire principles is a creatively unmatched use of bullshit. Nicely shoveled though. Very Irish.
And no, trying nothing really hasn't been tried since before FDR's actions prolonged the Great Depression for a dozen years. I hear the Chicken Little's cluckin'. But what I see is a situation that worsens with each action by Washington - regardless of the clueless inhabitant of the White House.
If spending ourselves out of a debt/credit crisis was a good idea, we'd do it all the time. Everyone who manages a personal budget knows there's a reason we don't.
Sláinte
"Nicely shoveled though. Very Irish."
Thank you. I hope I left enough room to blame the English a little, too.
I repeat, the Bush stimulus was strike one, the TARP bank rescue (?) was strike two, Obama’s giant pork hoagie is strike three.
The first two bills were bi-partisan blunders; this last one is all Democrat.
Remember this old adage, “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me”? Until now there wasn’t the need for “fool me three times.”
Scott Armstrong
...and I hope that Nancy Pelosi is enjoying her scheduled trip to Europe right now.
GEE, BO, you spent your entire Valentines Day on your computer defending yourself from anonymous attacks?
That is sad, dude. You should have at least got your hand some
skin cream, if not flowers.
Or gid you give the flowers to the "Grandma?"
I think Grandma's real name might be "Della Laptop!" LOLOLOLOL!
Anon 12:32, If you take the time to actually read the above comments, you will find many informative comments detailing the pros and cons of the stimulus package waiting for Obama's signature. With the exception of the usual Villa taunt and some inane comment that was probably posted by you, it is an excellent thread that proves many people are wll-informed, passionate and can argue without getting personal. Perhaps you should try it sometime.
I am very happy Mr.Dent voted against this bill.
Thank you Charlie Dent. Thank you for holding true to your values and those of your District. Our children's children will be paying for this joke of a bill that is nothing more than pork barrel spending and will stimulate nothing!!
""" Bryan said...
I really hope this stimulus succeeds. People seem like they're dying to rip apart Obama for anything. He proposes a stimulus and people start drooling at the mouth to rip him apart. How many people on here have read this stimulus? """ Bryan.. I like your point. But the fact is How many Senators have even read it!!!!!!!!!! They were forced to vote on a 800 billion(at least) bill they did not even have a chance to read. I ask you, is this change we can believe in? Thanks Henry
Everybody's an economist these days. It must be the number one major in college. I hear FOX News is giving out the diplomas.
If Dent is so against government spending why did he vote for the war in Iraq ($597 Billion as of today).
Post a Comment