What Krugman said:

"Shouldn’t Obama have made a much bigger plan, say $1.3 trillion, his opening gambit? If he had, he could have conceded to the centrists by cutting it to $1.2 trillion, and still have had a plan with a good chance of really controlling this slump. Instead he made preemptive concessions, only to find the centrists demanding another pound of flesh as proof of their centrist power."

The next time Arlen Specter gets chemotherapy, he should offer to save the taxpayers some money and only accept 80 percent of the recommended dosage. Then, if that isn't enough, he can come back for more later.

there will be future packages, but that was a given under any circumstances.

and with this package in place, it will be easier to withstand the threat of a filibuster next time: this package could not be held up, the economic deterioration is happening too quickly, but with this in place, the time leverage changes.

given that $300B was regarded as radical last october, and given the overall makeup of the senate, this gets a b to b+....

"... to applaud them for their patriotism ..."

what? So all the others are unpatriotic?

Reportedly, Senator Vitter wants to read it over the weekend, which implies a hold, or threatened filibuster. I guess he wants to make sure the diaper industry has been adorned with some er... stimulus.

what? So all the others are unpatriotic?

Roger. Given the circumstances and the posturing of the opposition, unpatriotic is a good description.

it will be easier to withstand the threat of a filibuster next time

hi, you HAVE actually seen the Senate Democratic caucus in action, yes?

they couldn't withstand the threat of a marshmallow.

next up - kiss your Social Security goodbye. we need that money for the bankers. and all the rest of the money, too. and all of your kids' money. and their kids. because we are Earnest and Pragmatic and Bipartisan, and we know how to make the Tough Choices about how you are going to pay to keep us in charge. and if you don't, we'll say Boo! and Socialism! and then you'll all be scared!

So that's it? Everything now automatically takes 60 votes to pass the Senate? Funny how it didn't work that way when it was the GOP in charge.

Probably the best description of what just happened is "Senate Gone Wild!".

In no university would most of the arguments presented by the Republicans or Democrats get a passing grade.

We are talking total delusion.

As long as delusions can substitute for reality we are totally screwed.

Krugman is not god. I know some liberals think he is, but as another economist pointed out Krugman did his work in trade not macroeconomics. Obama would have been nuts to ask for a stimulus of over a trillion. That is just insane. There aren't enough short term projects to throw that much money at and we don't want to rush long-term projects by putting them in this bill. Obama will pass an energy plan and health care plan by being able to pitch it as a stimulus besides things we desperately need. If this stimulus was larger he would not be able to pass any other large spending bill.

what? So all the others are unpatriotic?

That's what we've been told repeatedly by conservatives for the past eight years -- if you stand in the president's way in a time of crisis, it must be because you hate America.

Anyone know what the differences between the house and Senate bills are? Will there be much action in reconciliation?

It's very disappointing to learn that nearly half of this bill entails tax cuts and that so many goodies have been removed apparently.

But it's also hard to know what Obama was hoping for specifically and too easy to look back and say
he should have asked for more.

Maybe he didn't expect the amount to go down so much, didn't think the cuts would be this severe, that Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats would be this stupid and pig-headed and self-serving petty asses--all the while seriously asserting that a stimulus bill should have no spending!

But it does seem he went way too far with offering up the preemptive concessions, which were given away precipitously.

And he did fail to sell this bill in a clear and forceful way. But again, I think he really didn't think he'd needed to. Frankly, I didn't think he would need to either. It just seemed like such a no-brainer.

I wonder after it ultimately passes how the Republicans will frame their part in it--will they claim they tried to block it or claim they made it better or will some idiots try to claim both?

I can't believe Judd Gregg abstained. What a jerk. What a cop-out.

If Obama and Democratic leaders actually want an effective bill with popular, productive programs and tax cuts to pass, they need to stick to *Democratic* policies and ideas during the reconciliation process (assuming that they only need 218 votes in the House for the committee report once it's consolidated and 50+1 in the Senate).

Sucking up to conservative Dems and the non-insane Republicans in the Senate might be necessary at this stage, but it really shouldn't tie the hands of the conferees.

Unless, that is, Obama and the congressional Democratic leadership and caucuses *want* it to.

In other news, perhaps someone can ask Ben Nelson when he decided to let Karl Rove stick his hand up his ass and move his lips for him.

Dissappointing wrote, "I think he really didn't think he'd needed to. Frankly, I didn't think he would need to either. "

Me neither. And if you and Obama and I all thought that he didn't need to, how could anyone have known?

Every single thing through Congress will continue to be a war, we just have new rules of battle.

The next time Arlen Specter gets chemotherapy, he should offer to save the taxpayers some money and only accept 80 percent of the recommended dosage. Then, if that isn't enough, he can come back for more later.

Arlen Specter: That's right folks! I not only fucked up the Warren Commission report, I also fucked up the American economy!

Just curious, but if the Conference Committee were to basically roll back the Senate cuts and restore it to what the House wanted, could the Senate filibuster the final bill? Or do they only get to filibuster this bill?

Is there a good site to find out what the budget reconciliation rules is all about?

rana explained in a previous thread:

To pass the bill under reconciliation rules they need to have the reconciliation instructions. Those would be written into the fiscal 2010 budget bill that the House and Senate have not yet started, and would normally complete in April/May. Thus, Kevin, while technically correct, is basically wrong, if he wants the stimulus passed quickly.

Does that imply that this coming April/May Obama can ask for extra stimulus and the House can pass a bill without consulting with the Republicans, and the Senate can pass the same bill with an up or down vote, avoiding a Republican filibuster.

If that is true that would be GREAT news. I wonder if that's what Obama has been thinking a along. Allowing the Republican to act like total morons in front of the cameras, making incoherent arguments, etc... then replay them when they start complaining.

Great strategy. :)

Paul Krugman has predicted 9 of the last 3 recessions. While he is smarter than Barbara Boxer, so is my cat.

It is amusing that some here are criticizing Arlen Spector. Without his limpdick participation in this compromise, the thing wouldn't be occurring, yet you imbeciles are criticizing the guy. I am a conservative. I'm the one that should be criticizing this goofball.

Krugman is not god. I know some liberals think he is, but as another economist pointed out Krugman did his work in trade not macroeconomics.

Krugman isn't a former economist, he is a working and active academic economist, so referring to his work in the past tense is the first mistake. Further, his work is not restricted to trade. He's actually done quite a bit of work in, surprise surprise, macroeconomics, particularly in the context of market crises. So that "other economist" is either a fiction, ignorant, or lying.

In the internet age, with Google Scholar, its pretty easy to look up what people have published papers on.

Obama would have been nuts to ask for a stimulus of over a trillion. That is just insane. There aren't enough short term projects to throw that much money at and we don't want to rush long-term projects by putting them in this bill.

Aside from projects, just using the Federal government's easy capacity to borrow money (something that both procedurally and due to credit markets, states don't have) to provide short-term crisis funding to states so that they stop taking anti-stimulative actions due to revenue drops resulting from the recession and have funds to expand assistance programs to match the growing eligible populations rather than cutting benefits at the time when more people need them would help a lot, and given the scale of the cutbacks states are making could easily justify somewhere on the order of $100 billion+ in additional funds.

The country held hostage by a minority of senators tells me the filibuster senate rule needs to be changed. For nine years now it has served only to obstruct the progress of this nation. The majority of this nation is being blackmailed for political gain and it's high time it stopped.

Republicans have stalled until they got the best bill they think will actually fail to stimulate the economy at the nations expense.

They would rather destroy our nation than lose an election. Just look at how they've wrecked it so far and apparently aren't done yet...and won't be until they have the ultra rich and the working poor as the only classes in the US. Their economics come from multimillionaires and billionaires none of whom will ever worry about losing their job or their home. Did McCain get another tax cut?? for another home buy?? After 8yrs of wrecking America they still are not done yet.

"Country First" means picking Palin to be VP and tax cuts for the wealthy. The very survival of our democracy means gutting the republican influence from government. Change the senate rules to stop their obstructionism...the times demand it.

btw...how is getting a couple of republican votes to overcome a filibuster after catering to their denmands, called "bipartisanship". Means the same it always did to republicans...our way or no way.

Country first my ass.

Lolis said "Krugman is not god...." YES he is...by comparison to the republican's rhetoric and plans.
I bet you put one quart of oil in your car and if it starts smoking then you add another right? Right up until that red light comes on and stays on.
There is a whole history behind stimulating the economy...the methods that worked and those that didn't...since before FDR even. Krugman has a Nobel prize to qualify his opinions and is just relating 'history' to us. You have to throw enough stimulus spending to get the economy working or it just goes bad again...and this is what the republicans want to happen...they want it to fail so they will (in the words of Gulianni)gain political capital which is more important to them than the economy. Give 'em just enough to hope that it will fail but enough so they don't reject it kind of Graham speak. Obstructionists to the very end. By Monday there will be an additional 40,000 more unemployed ready to hit the streets...but we have to make sure we get it right..."get it right"???!!!Hell they're already as wrong as they can be. Goobers.

To prove the point...they mocked and questioned Beekeepers ins...which they already voted to pass twice before in the last congress...which is actually livestock ins...and they stood there laughing about it without a clue that they were looking so stupid being all for it twice before.

Stimulus bill is just a spending bill.-Vitter. DUH!

McCain- More tax cuts for the wealthy who don't need any stimulus...DUH!

Republicans:- Caut food stamps out as that's not stimulus. For every dollar spent in FS we get $1.73 back in stimulus spending...guaranteed. DUH!

Here's Rachel Maddow's special comment showing facts that demonstrate how stupid these republicans are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHw773EO314

Without his limpdick participation in this compromise, the thing wouldn't be occurring, yet you imbeciles are criticizing the guy.

That's why.

It still amazes--and saddens--me that there is all of this hullaballoo about spending a huge amount of money for a stimulus, yet there was nothing approaching that when it came to the bank bailout, which passed in about 5 minutes compared to this.

Represent the people? I think not.