Stimulus due date: Feb. 16th

Posted: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:36 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: Congress

From NBC's Mike Viqueira

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Congress will have the stimulus package to the president by Feb. 16th, the scheduled beginning of the congressional President's Day recess.

She says that committee action will begin next week, with action on the House floor the week after.

She vows that Congress will not leave for recess until the measure has been passed.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

I want to support this stimulous plan! Where do I send my check? Would the IRS be the appropriate place to send it?

Danny Wilcox, Texas (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:45 AM)

Barack Obama and his cabinet have strength, intelligence and are capable of leading our country.
Those who do not put our survial first need to be
eliminated from any power or decision making.
We voted for change and that is what we demand from
all politicans. No more politics as usual. ENOUGH!!

katiec Pekin, IL (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:46 AM)

Republicans should all just vote no, sit back, and watch the train wreck.

Joe T., Florida (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:46 AM)

will someone please do something about the crawl at the bottom of the screen. While Obama was speaking, it never stopped giving us irrelevant news to siphon off our concentration.

judy wachs, aptos, ca (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:47 AM)

Ah, but lets see how quickly the Repukes in the Senate filibuster this thing, because they don't want Obama and the congressional Dems. to succeed! But then again, this was all Clinton' fault, right, and when the economy recovers, it will be thanks to Bush, right? [note sarcasm].

Pat Huntington NY (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:48 AM)

that depends on the politicians putting america first instead of politics and party first. if there are no obstructionists it will happen. if they start grand tanding in congress we are in the house and senate then we are in trouble.

ace (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:51 AM)

Should have made it April 15th. People could then send in their money and watch as Nancy flushes it down the crapper.

Don Rivers, Orlando (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:51 AM)

Great. But it's no more than we ought to expect from truly dedicated elected officials in the middle of a serious crisis.

Now if they could just vow not to take a vacation until they end the war in Iraq, restore our civil liberties, fix Social Security and Medicare, decrease our dependence on foreign oil and fossil fuels in general, improve education, and accomplish the rest of the agenda they should have accomplished the past 8 years, that would REALLY be a promise.

Anna Molly (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:52 AM)

[When eight in 10 Americans already support Obama's approach to the economy]

8 in 10 Americans don't even know what Obama's plan is for the economy. Most are just listening to Olberman to tell them what to think anyway.

Kellie Kass, twc (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:56 AM)

Hey S clyde Stein in Ohio...paying half your pay in taxes...to do that you need taxable income in excess of 500K to hit the 50% mark...try again joe the plumber/war correspondant

Sick of the Republican lies

----------------

It is true. Federal tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, State Tax, Real Estate Tax, Sales Tax, County Tax. Add it up, it's more then 50% of the my gross pay. Could be worse. Could live in California.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

S Clyde-Stein, Ohio (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:02 PM)

"One President at a time." Hmm...That must only apply to issues that Obama doesn't care to touch. I hope Obama's ready...in less than two weeks, he will run out of excuses.

Jill F., Tulsa, OK (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:03 PM)

Ok - let's get this ball rolling and if anyone in congress don't understand the enormous importancy of this stimulus package and tries to block it or fill it with pork.

We the people will make sure you are fired or impeached.

The poloticial games are over and our country needs it representatives to work for the country's interests not lobbists or coorperations.

Furthermore, let us not forget the stimulus package will not mean "crap" if we allow the energy cost to creep back up.

Chris Matthew's made a hell of a point and I agree with him 100% - it's the gas prices stupid.

We can not allow the gas prices to raise because of the greed of oil companies or forgein entities.

The high gas prices contributed and cost all the other aspects and assets of our enonomy to crumble.

No one can pay, mortages, car loans, credit cards, shop at department stores, take vacations, etc - if 90% of their income is going towards paying for gas, and energy.

We must regulate and put a cap on gas prices - I would say no more than $1.50 a gallon and less is even better.

GAS PRICES, GAS PRICES, GAS PRICES, remember this a year from now.

Thank you and GOD BLESS AMERICA

The - Democrat Soldier (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:04 PM)

by the 16th all the democants will have it all porked up.

Welcome to Changesville

Ted K, Hyannis, MA (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:11 PM)

Yeah better we should take the example set by Dole and Gingrich and, when we don't get our way, we just bring the government to a screeching halt for several days. Yeah, that's impressive leadership.

Jackson, Seattle

-----------------

It's already happening Jackson. Governments all over the country at the state and local levels are shutting down. Governor Arnold S. in CA is asking all state employees to take two unpaid days off a month for at least the next year and half. Chicago, with the highest city taxes in the country, is cutting back city services such as snow plowing, and it's infrastructure such as public transportation is old and is crumbling. It's happending Jackson. The overbloated and overcommitted state and city governments are failing. The feds are getting away with it for a time because they don't have to run a balanced budget. It will catch up to them soon enough though too.

Wasn't it Dole that attempted to get a balanced budget amendment passed in the '90s?

Mike T., Iowa (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:12 PM)

Here's some 2nd Grade math for you:

What does
$370,000,000,000.00
Plus
$800,000,000,000.00
Equal ???

It equals this congress spending my 2nd grade daughters economy, thats what it equals! They are printing and spending money so fast the Federal Mint can't keep up.

Next question...

Why ????

It is a economic raid on the economy by the baby boomer generation. It is a rabid grab of false wealth they created for thier retirement. The baby boomers treated it like Monopoly money. And now they are poised to make a grab at the prosperity of the next two generations.

Stop stealing from the children.
No more stimulus. No more bailouts.

Balanced budget. No deficit spending.

So for all you idiots out there that voted how your TV told you: This is change? THANKS FOR NOTHING!

RH, Oregon (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:13 PM)

Just how hard is it, spending money you don't have?

Amex Visa (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:18 PM)

So, Bush spending money was bad, Obama spending much more money is good?

And, how's the National Debt monitor that keeps track of the debt in real time doing these days? They oil up the gears on that thing? Add another most significant digit or two to it?

Matt Woodside, NY (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:21 PM)

Jim (Thursday, January 8, 2009 8:52 AM) (from a previous thread) ~

If McCain has been effective in reducing earmarks, then why are you and I having this conversation? The fact is that he hasn’t – just like he was ineffectual when the Wall Street meltdown arose. Feingold happens to be one of my senators, and I admire him greatly, but the road to Hades is paved with good intentions, not to mention land mines, as evidenced by the fact that McCain-Feingold has produced no meaningful campaign finance reform.

Having watched for a long time, I’m not really hopeful that Congress, without help from the President, in the form of veto threat, would be able to control itself. That’s why I say that Obama may be the only answer, and only if he is willing to use his veto pen to do what Congress cannot. Another reason I say that Obama is the solution to earmarks is that George Bush has always taken the position that if pork is added to legislation at his request, it is not an earmark.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/washington/10earmark.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=bush%20earmarks&st=cse

So, even if Congress learns to control itself, unless Obama does the same, it’s back to square zero.

In the final analysis, however, I’m a democrat, and I happen to think that earmarks should be judged on their individual merit. We do need new bridges from time to time.

Anna Molly (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:28 PM)

A breakdown.

$370,000,000,000.00 Bailout
$800,000,000,000.00 "Stimulus"

Barrak Obama President Term
4 years (+ last 3 months of Bush's)
= $754,838,710.00 per day
= $31,451,613.00 per hour
= $524,194.00 per minute
= $34,493.00 per second

So the greedy baby boom generation politicians that have robbed the bank the whole upswing, now want to control HALF A MILLION DOLLARS PER MINUTE for the next 4 years?

But of course how else can they can rob the downswing too!!!!!!!

RH Oregon (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:30 PM)

What some people seem to forget is that this “stimulus package” is going to have to be paid for by someone at some time and in some way. No doubt that way will eventually be in the form of higher taxes. In other words, what this brainstorm amounts to is the raising of your taxes to supplement your income which, of course, is nothing more than an exercise in IDIOCY!!

— thetruthhurts

truth hurts, Chicago, Ill (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:36 PM)

Is this what it takes to jack up the Congress, threaten to take away their holiday until a bill is passed? Sure we need due diligence and deliberation but sometimes it seems to take far too long. This especially so with a topic such as the economy, the focus of discussion after discussion. What more needs to be said that hasn't? I know, if it benefits the little guy the Republicans will not like it. They will try and block it or get it watered down so much as to be useless but that's how they are. Nancy needs to talk to those moderate Republicans and not worry about the neocons and ubercons who are worthless anyway and get those moderates to vote with the Democrats. That will FINALLY get this nation moving in the right direction.

eagle1776 (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:44 PM)

Republicans like Joe T. should shut the heck up and start paying for America instead of just cheering for her...bet he is a non serving chickenhawk too

Jerry/corpus christi (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:51 PM)

Why do Republicans so hate their fellow Americans? Most of you crackers couldn't pay for your own health insurance if not for employer or government welfare...you don't pay as much in taxes as you think you do and your religious and social ignorance deserves the back of our hands

Ralphie (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:53 PM)

Please stop giving bailouts to anyone other than the taxpayer themselves! Its up to the consumer to decide if a bank, automaker or any other business should stay afloat by how competitive/useful the business is. Giving all this money to these other corperations is NOT healthy for a free world economy!
IF they cant be competitive, make them learn how, if banks made bad loans out of greed, let them pay the consequenses-that is doing them a favor, dont bail them out so they can do it again!! America needs to take responsibility for her actions. Please politicians, help this country grow up and learn responsibility, dont baby everyone while the rest of the world goes on and surpasses us in an already tight market! That is hurting the US corporations by making them noncompetitive with the rest of the world!

Chris, Austin Tx (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:54 PM)

They shouldn't go on recess considering they just got a pay raise of $4,700. I'm just curious why this isn't being talked about more considering the American people were really complaining how much the Big Three automakers got paid. I doubt that very few of them were making 160,000 and the health benefits arenothing like our politicians have.

Jane Portland, MI (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 12:59 PM)

by the 16th all the democants will have it all porked up.

Welcome to Changesville
Ted K, Hyannis, MA
*************************************************

Preparing a crow dinner...as one of us will be eating it depending on how Obama handles this. My bet is on Obama....and the dems to fix this mess

Hope you can choke it down.... (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:01 PM)

So will Obama promise to veto any bill that comes to his desk that have earmarks? Will his promise mean as much as the one he made last week when he said Roland Burris would not be seated in the Senate?

Just Asking (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM)

Ralphie ~

Ummmm. Crackers. Good idea. I'll be a goldfish.

"The wholesome snack that smiles back ..."

After all, gold is probably the only good investment right now since the republicans wrecked the economy.

Alice K (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:05 PM)

Damn!!I was hoping for another stimulus check.I've been eyeing up a nice HD LCD Big Screen for the SuperBowl.

Big Ben (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:12 PM)

All of the Republicans on the blog - people like RH Oregon.

What's you plan - better yet if you are so smart, why didn't you help Bushy do something to stop this mess from happening in the first place.

Instead of being someone that what to focus of the obvious and negativity of a stimulus package.

Why don't you present something to PE Obama's administration that will not cost us or our children a dime?

Do you have any idea? - Should we just continue down the path left by U.S. from your great hero George Bush?

Or will you be happy to see this great country of ours become a third world.

You people know how to criticize and be scam bags, but have absolutely no solution of your own.

F - You - no body cares - I would rather my grand children pay a debt, than to have a country that they can no longer live in because of debt - got it.

Thank you and GOD BLESS AMERICA

The - Democrat Soldier (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:14 PM)

Let's hope the congress does the right thing and give Obama the help he needs. He is trying to help this country get back on it's feet. If no one can see that than they are more stupid than I thought. Don't forget, if you screw this one up, there is another election just around the corner.

JoAnn, Moundsville, WV (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:22 PM)

some don't know the difference between bailouts, loans and the complexities of a recovery package. bailouts don't get paid back. loans and recoveries do. if the economy is stimulated properly, jobs and spending will return. the tax credits and incentives that are being proposed will lure business back to america well as help small business. the likely hood of stimulating the economy to health is better with this plan than doing nothing.hopefully in a few years we can begin to pay down this massive debt. it's better than nothing being done at all. simple tax cuts won't get us there. we must recognize that what is being proposed aren't simple bailouts. by the way this initial tax break is just the first tax break in a series of tax breaks that will come to americans in obama's recovery plan. i don't get it. the countries economy is in a bad way all the while getting worse evryday and people are just griping and complaining. whenever someone offers an idea folks just gripe. i'd rather someone try to do something than nothing.

ace (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:24 PM)

Republicans should all just vote no, sit back, and watch the train wreck.
Joe T., Florida (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:46 AM)
_________

Which would prove they have absolutely no real interest in being part of the process if they aren't in the majority. And it would only further slide the party from GOP to SWCP.

Tell you what, if you don't want them to vote at all, why not just tell them all to give up their seats then.

Jackson, Seattle (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:47 PM)

Ah, but lets see how quickly the Repukes in the Senate filibuster this thing, because they don't want Obama and the congressional Dems. to succeed
------------------------------------------------
Pat in Huntington, did you ever stop to think that maybe they just don't want 775 billion dollars spent rashly and aren't convinced it's going to make a difference? Even some Blue Dog Dems are expressing their doubts. Instead of assuming they don't want Obama to succeed, maybe they just want to be prudent.

Jack, Dallas (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:22 PM)

Whatever happen to taking care of those who take care of you? For instance, I am single, living on one income from paycheck to paycheck, yet I pay my bills on time, I bought a house and car I could afford, I go to work everyday for less than I paid for my education with no relief in site. I am not at all opposed to helping people, but only to helping those who want and are trying to help themselves; not those individuals/companies who are okay with having the govt' continuously give them money without any self worth. I just wish the "good guys" aka working middle-class could catch a break a little more often.

JLT Missouri (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:26 PM)

It would be better (Cheaper) if you gave every legal American citizen a $100,000.00. Then they could pay off the their home loan (the banks would benefit from the income). Then this would free up the people to make purchases that they feel currently like they can not make. And in the meantime this would be cheapier for the government than bsiling out all the large corps. The only way the corps should contiune to get bail outs if they remove the current managment team that got the corps in the rotten condition to start with. Please think about giving back to the PEOPLE instead of the BIG BUSINESSES!!!!!

L Jones, Cullman, AL (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 2:57 PM)

Anna,

McCain has been ineffective in reducing earmarks because he is in the minority. Thats not hard to figure out. Congress (both parties) likes earmarks. Congress controls the budget, not the President - Government 101. Unless the President gets a line item veto or Congress passes a law similar to what McCain and Feingold are advocating, nothing will change. Obama can advocate change but he can't mandate it. That has to come from Congress. I agree earmarks should be judged on individual merit but thats not what happens. They are hidden in markups after the debate. They should be part of bills from day one if they truely have merit. Because of all that, I am not optimistic of meaningful change, regardless of who is President. I think there are going to be a lot of disappointed people who have their expectations set way too high for President Obama in this and other areas. Id like to believe otherwise but Im realistic.

Jim (Sent Thursday, January 08, 2009 3:34 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1737077