Why do the Republicans have to support the Stimulus Package?
By bobmnu
@bobmnu (8157)
United States
January 28, 2009 10:36am CST
If the Stimulus package is so great why does President Obama need the Republicans to support it? He has enough votes to pass it if all the Democrats support it. If it is successful he could then claim all the credit, it would be known as The Obama Stimulus Program, just like the Bush tax cuts are owned by President Bush. My guess is that he knows the plan will not work and he can blame the failure on the compromises he had to make to the Republicans. In the mean time he has many of his other plans in place. If you study where the money is going you will see that it is going to grow government and to support the Labor Unions. There is a large amount of money (over 1 billion dollars) for Community Development Activities – which is ACORN. Is this a pay back for all the legal and illegal voters they signed up?
The first stimulus package did not work; remember you check from the government and then the first bail out. Neither one worked but in 2001 (as in 1982, and 1962) tax cuts gave the economy a shot right now and pulled us out of the recession. We are being told that this is going to take time to work maybe 6 to 8 years. Can we afford to wait that long. It will be two years before this Stimulus package goes into effect. I say let the Democrats own this package and if it fails it is their failure. In 2010 the voters can ask are you better off with the stimulus package and unemployed or were you better off with the tax cuts and working?
1 person likes this
4 responses
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
28 Jan 09
Bob, they don't have to support it, but politically it could be very bad for republicans if they don't support it and it works. This is why it is in everyones best interest to find a compromise, and have a bill that the vast majority supports. I am surprised the conservatives are speaking out so much, it would be in their best interest to keep quite, and let the bill go through and then hope that it doesn't work, and go from there for 2012.
The problems that conservatives have is that they supported Bush, and his administration famously said "deficits don't matter". So now conservatives have a problem attacking Democrats over the deficit when Bush created the largest in history.
It might be in the best interest of the republican party to stand their ground, and end up like Democrats in the early part of this century: Hope the economy doesn't do very well. Not what republicans like to do, but politicaly that may be the only way they have a chance to win in 2012
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
28 Jan 09
Well right now they have to fight it because it has too much pork that won't stimulate anything. They've already succeeded in getting rid of the $200 millionthat Pelosi wanted in there for birth control to stimulate the economy and they removed the $50 million to resod the grounds at the National Mall. There's still $400 million in there for climate change research to placate the environmentalist.
Republicans lost big in the last election. Now they need to stand there ground and show America exactly what they stand for. Many people were saying that democrats and republicans are pretty much the same and if they support Obama as blindly as the democrats in congress have, then they'll make those people right.
Blindly approving a trillion dollar stimulus package is bad no matter who does it. There are many democrats who may fail their reelection bids because they supported the bailout and if they support this and it fails, that's just one more nail in their coffin. I think it was McCaskill who said she wouldn't support it because she is now constantly criticized by her constituents even when she grocery shops with people shouting "Where's my bailout?"
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
28 Jan 09
"(remember the bridge to no where? That was approved by a republicans controlled congress)"
Of course I remember that. Obama and Biden supported it every time it came to a vote and even voted against redirecting that money to help rebuild after Katrina. You might want to recheck the numbers on it if you don't believe me.
"I think that republicans should be happy that Obama is talking to them, and offering to compromise"
He's talking to them to get support. He isn't really interested in compromising. He only needs them to use as scapegoats later.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
28 Jan 09
I think that the package has alot of stuff in it, and you know there will always be stupid projects that need to be stopped (remember the bridge to no where? That was approved by a republicans controlled congress). I think that republicans should be happy that Obama is talking to them, and offering to compromise, he really doesn't need them. I think that the package will help the country get out of this mess that the republicans made. If they leave this mess to Obama, and try to block the package then they will lose more seats in 2010, and 2012.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
28 Jan 09
Because if he gets bipartisan support for it, he gets to blame the republicans if something goes wrong. The problem is, he doesn't want a "Bipartisan Bill" he just wants "Bipartisan Support" for an extremely partisan bill with zero input from republicans. After all "He won". Welcome to the dictatorship.
@Benjaminna (300)
• United States
28 Jan 09
I think it's because he's trying to be bipartisan, like he said he would be. However, bipartisan goes both ways. I just hope Republicans stand their ground and refuse to vote for it unless he takes some of that crap out. Even if it will still pass with out Republican votes - when/if it fails we can say we didn't have anything to do with it.
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
28 Jan 09
Because he wants both sides to be blamed when it does not work....that way the republicans can not use it as a weapon in the next election. If they do then he can say well you supported it too.
I have noticed his version of bipartisanship means "agree with me". Personally I hope the republicans hold their ground and get all the junk out of it BEFORE they support it. Or if they can't get the democrats to take out the junk then they need to not support it at all.
