Well maybe if the leader of the Democrats would stop agreeing with Republican memes and actual lead in public, relentlessly, on the jobs issues, there'd be less wavering congressional Dems.

Same for his no-good pit bull Blue Dog of a chief of staff.

It seems to me that these "half measures" - where Dems do enough to slow a decline but not enough to pull the economy out of a stall exposes them to the worst of both worlds. They are unpopular because the economy isn't generating enough jobs and they are unppopular because it seems like the stimulus isn't working. Trying to work with a party - Republicans - that truly doesn't care about the plight of ordinary Americans and is completely focused on regaining power with a strategy that emphasized inaction makes governing nearly impossible.

My governor- Ed Rendel- and a few other clear minded chaps have been beating the drum for a long term program to re-build our crumbling infrastructure.

In the Olden Days municipalities paid for sewers and roads and stuff by issuing tax free bonds, and folks dug under the mattress to help themselves by helping their neighbors.

There is a TRILLION dollars squirreled away, in T bills and money market accounts paying less than 1%. If we invested that money in "Re-Build America" bonds, think of the jobs created, And the REI for Mr. & Mrs. America. . .

Want to end frivolous filibusters?

Vote out Republicans in November.

(but y'all already knew that.)

The first two commenters nail it. First and foremost, Obama needs to speak loud and often on the issue; instead he seems invisible.

Where is the monthly chart you were doing when jobs were growing, showing Bush vs. Obama? You should do that again with an overlay of stimulus money- it seems like we're reaching the end of the stimulus and stuff is stalling, should be easy to illustrate.

Oh, I see it's two posts down. Well, the stimulus overlay would still be interesting.

This is Politico. Are there real attributions, or just weasel words? "Some early responses from rank and file Democrats" could just as well come from a Politico's imagination. Politico is to journalism as Rasmussen is to polling: wishful thinking will make it so. And it will, if the rest of us buy into it. There may be some defections, but the bill will pass because passing it is a better path to reelection for most Dems.

I couldn't agree more with Observer and sjw. The President is the single biggest problem. And yet you'll hear nary a critical work from Steve Benen.

Tax the rich @ 90%. This will decrease the deficit and increase jobs since the rich will be less rich and will want to earn more money.

The policiians enjoy the lobbyists more than they enjoy saving America.

Expecting Obama to speak out loud for something that he thinks that his advisers will perceive to be something that Republican operatives will tell them to be not agreeable to the Republican congressmen and senators is like expecting Lady Gaga to suddenly materialize in my shower while I am standing there naked trying to decide whether to just take a shower or to use the opportunity to play with myself.

I think it is time for a good old massive public works program where folks are directly employed by the government. Something like the WPA or CCC. Some of these people will already have the skills needed to run broadband internet connections to those areas lacking this almost necessary technology. Some could be deployed to fix the our crumbling infrastrucure. Others could provide training so that people will have the knowledge required to participate in our economy.

There are a million things that need doing and there are people out there who are available to do the work. The various state and local governments -- or community groups -- could propose projects. Maybe the local park needs some work, a school needs to be weatherized and the roof patched, the streets are crumbling, some apartment buildings need to be wired for high speed internet, the list could go on and on.

Direct employment by the government could reduce unemployment more quickly than any other approach.

First, Obama has spoken out, repeatedly on the need for this bill.

Second, this is a clear case where it is Nancy Pelosi and especially Majority Whip James Clyburn who need to twist as many arms as they have to, as hard as the have to, to get this bill passed.

The House already passed state aid once as part of a larger bill. This is only coming back to them because the Senate didn't pass the other bill and instead settled for this stripped-down version with spending and revenue offsets. Particularly with the House leadership calling them back into a special session, any Democrat that votes no is an idiot who is doing serious damage to their party, and to the country, and almost certainly won't help their own election chances no matter how conservative their district.

Using every tool at this House leadership's disposal to ensure party loyalty from House Democrats on this vote should be a no-brainer.

Sorry for the double post. Day hit it - I think I have seen some data that there is a lot of cash out there - stuffed in low yield accounts, etc. And of course, all of our rich friends should be willing to invest, eh?

So this a bit like being stuck in the mud with a car - the tires spin but don't quite get the traction. Romer was probably right. Stim. bill wasn't big enough; it also had too many cut tax credits, and needed more sustained infrastructure projects and jobs. It also had a lot of money for research, which is great, but long-term; also lots of money for energy things - again - things that employ some people, but for the long haul with small monthly payouts.

For anyone who cares. Here is a simple idea. Cut the cutsie stuff. THis is based on ideas folks had awhile ago.

1. Go to the Am. Soc. of Civil Engineers Infrastructure list, cut the amount in half; amoritize it over 5 years. Focus on water, sewer, transport, esp. rapid transport; key rail lines. Propose those projects. Starting Jan 1.

2. Loosenup every non military program in the fed govt; speed every f*** grant,, contract, etc. Now.

3. End the Gulf drilling moratorium; declare victory. Find every other blue collar job opportunity, and open it up. Find every rule, reg., and other block to speeding up spending that the president can legally suspend, and suspend them. Make the announcement at a Labor Day picnic in Kentucky or where ever.

4. Expand education grants for educations of people who are willing to do 5 yrs in Vet. services - medical, social work, drug and alc. counseling, etc. and psych., and expand the programs via VA and all other VA-related things to effectively deal with all the PTSD, Post Iraq/Post Afghan bills.

Put together a package, and find the votes, somehow. Then; three words. Lame duck session. Threaten to bring this up after the election; hell, even half of this will have repubs. peeing in their pants. Make it all about jobs. Americans want work? Fine. Threaten repubs. with a lame duck sesion that will include 10-40 bitter, or retiring, or whatever, congressmen and women, who are willing to actually vote the right way, and get some one, anyone, to explain in clear terms F*** the deficit. If there is a credible threat that a REALLY BIG bill might be passed after the election, maybe something could get passed before?

A guy can dream, can't he ?

I agree with Bob O'Reilly's post at 10:52.

Unfortunately, thanks to 30 years of Republican and consera-Dem policies, we no longer have a mechanism for the government to hire a bunch of people directly. Everything is set up for the governement to contract the work out. As seen particularly during the Bush administrations handling of the post-Katrina clean-up and rebuilding, this frequently has the worst possible results.

Politically connected firms with little or no expertise get "oversight" contracts. They then turn around and sub-contract the work out (sometimes through two or three layers). In the end, the government is overpaying for the work, the people actually doing the work are lucky to get minimum wage, and quality control is a complete crapshoot. But it would take major legislation and months or years of rebuilding the administrative mechanisms to let the government directly hire large numbers of people for short term projects.

observer: Well maybe if the leader of the Democrats would stop agreeing with Republican memes and actual lead in public, relentlessly, on the jobs issues, there'd be less wavering congressional Dems.

How the hell do you think this got pushed through Senate? Because some republicans voted for it out of the kindness of their hearts? Wake up and look around. Obama and his people are doing everthing they can to push through as much as possible. Whiney armchair quarterbacks certainly don't help the situation. Politico wants to sell ads and you guys play right along.

One difficulty now is that anything the Congress does on stimulus is not likely to have time to have any real effect on the economy before the elections. The time to do more was last year or early this year. Now, I can see why a Dem would think that these votes are the worst of both worlds.

To those above who say that Obama has done enough and his critics are whiners, my response is the following: Obama is too soft spoken. He should do a news conference every day on the issue. Mount a tv offensive, appearing on tv shows and at unemployment lines. He needs to show some passion and indignation.

Never forget, people: Politico = Faux News in print.

All this talk of crap shoots and nervous Dems and the story only quotes ONE Democrat (House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson) that supports their contention. Everything else alludes to unnamed aides. They could be pulling this shit out of their ass and probably are. There's no ability to confirm or deny these quotes.

I call BULLSHIT.

The problem for the Dems is that by ceding the bully pulpit, they've let the GOP frame the issues.

That's how we got to the point where all spending is now perceived as bad.

Doesn't make a difference how much formal power you have if you let the other side win the rhetorical battle.

@sjw

Obama has spoken repeatedly on the issue of jobs. Did you watch him yesterday or read his comments? Did you do anything to disseminate what he said to others? Send an email with video to friends and family? Talk it up at work or school? Call up your representative or senators and urge them to support the president's jobs legislation?

End the Gulf drilling moratorium; declare victory. bigtuna

Victory for Big Oil? No, do not end the moratorium at all. But if it must be ended do it only when there are strong regulations and penalties applying to drilling and spills that are enforced. Right now, there is no such thing. Human beings are great at having short memories. Just a few weeks ago the BP gusher had the potential to be a catastrophe of world wide impact. We dodged a bullet, even as the impact was still disastrous for the Gulf ecology and economy.

Let's get it right, either no drilling, or strict controls--no half measures again.

I disagree with much of the commentary today. I dont think we need another huge stimulus. Small targeted stimuli to assist states is acceptable, but it is now time for corporations to step in.

They are literally sitting on 1.4 trillion dollars in cash. They must now start expanding R&D, hiring and cap X expenditures.

Obama/Geithner/Summers should focus on persuading/coercing/bribing corporations to take an active role in private sector hiring. What to do specifically?

1. Pass Wyden Gregg tax bill.
2. Fast track Columbia trade.
3. Continue focus on expanding exports.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/obama-to-report-on-plan-to-increase-exports/

4. Repeal tax cuts to 250k+ individuals and replace with payroll tax cut to corporations who hire XYZ number of employees.
5. Have a chat with the CEOs. Explain to them Obama administration is not "anti business" and their whiny rhetoric is not helpful. Is is really wrong to point out some corporations have behaved badly and then correct those problems?
6. Finally, republicans who obstruct any of these efforts should be targeted for termination.

Well maybe if the leader of the Democrats would stop agreeing with Republican memes and actual lead in public, relentlessly, on the jobs issues, there'd be less wavering congressional Dems. Same for his no-good pit bull Blue Dog of a chief of staff. Posted by: Observer on August 6, 2010 at 10:21 AM

Since you obviously failed even rudimentary American government classes I'll spell it out for you.

1. Congress is a separate, co-equal branch to the Executive and Judiciary branches.

2. The President does not lead or head the Congress, the Majority Leader in the Senate and the Speaker of the House lead in their respective chambers.

3. Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House, she is responsible for whipping those feckless House Democrats into line, NOT Obama.

What is with Firebagger Irrational Obama Hatred? Racism? I'm beginning to suspect so.

And what is with their knee-jerk hatred of Rahm Emanuel? Is it antisemitism? I'm beginning to suspect so.

Unfortunately, the Dems are just as responsible as the Repubs. for pushing the idea that teachers are lazy incompetents who are are--horror of horrors--unionized. And we all (all right those who are either rich or brainwashed) know that unions are bad, bad, bad. So it's no wonder that the public isn't seeing the value of having teachers keep their jobs.

ceilidth: the Dems are just as responsible as the Repubs. for pushing the idea that teachers are lazy incompetents who are are--horror of horrors--unionized.

"Just as responsible," eh? You have absolutely nothing to back up that statement. Give me any quotes whatsoever of dem leaders calling teachers "lazy incompetents" or saying that they shouldn't be unionized. This is just stupid crap.

This seems like the perfect time to offer to eliminate many corporate subsidies on, oh, I don't know, the oil and gas production industries? The agricultural processing industries? Then use that money to save the jobs of teachers.

The most "damning" (from the perspective of the Rs) thing they can say about this is that it's "saving the unions" (or some other slur on unions). It's weak tea that tastes good to the Rs, and isn't all that attractive to people that know their children are facing class sizes of 30-40 in the very near future.

Benen: But for some panicky House Dems, saving jobs means spending money, and "spending = bad." Why? Because Republicans say so.

My questions are; Why does the Democratic party leave it to political office-holders to change public opinion in their districts? Why do Democrats expect their office-holders to ignore public opinion?

The Democratic party organization may have the facts behind them but they don't seem to have the strategy. Neither do registered Democratic voters.

Disclosure: I'm a Democrat.

For academia:
Remember, there is difference between "public opinion" and what is broadcast on the evening news. Worry over jobs and the economy poll in the top two or three positions in most polls, deficit fears at ninth or tenth place.
Republicans aren't "changing" public opinion in the districts they represent, it would be a good thing if they were. What they ARE doing is validating the views of the radicals in their party, rather than "educate" said opinion holders as to why THEY should change.
It makes for great television, rousing rallies, and brings in gobs of cash but, short of disenfranchising any and all opponents, leads to certain death as a national party.
Provided the party doesn't destroy the country first...

@Observer:
"Same for his no-good pit bull Blue Dog of a chief of staff."

Rahmbo is not much of a pit bull. More of a poodle ... you know, a sort of lap dog for the Republicans.

Republicans move public opinion and seize opportunities. Democrats react to what they perceive to be public opinion.

Bush got his tax cuts and pretty much everything else he wanted despite having far smaller majorities in Congress than Obama has.

Bush campaigned tirelessly for his program in Democrat's home territory, moving public opinion there and making Democrats feel like they could not oppose him.

Don't expect that kind of audacity from Obama. Ooh. Ick. He doesn't want to get his hands dirty. It's the audacity of timidity.

Bush used reconciliation routinely to get his way, getting around the filibuster. How unseemly. Obama would never do that.

I thought we were electing a leader.

Hope is not a plan and that's all they have left.

I hope the electorate is smart enough to not elect idiots.

I hope the economy heals itself.

I hope the job market starts getting stronger.

I hope the voters don't throw us out.

Bush gutted a balanced budget without even winning an election.

I hope someday the Democratic party's elected officials awaken to the game they are in and start showing up to play it.

And a pony, also, too.