News and Politics | January 28, 2009 | 47 comments

House passes $819 billion stimulus bill

source: http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/28/news/economy/house_vote_wednesday/index.htm?cnn=yes

Image
merasyad
The House on Wednesday evening passed an $819 billion economic stimulus package Wednesday on a party-line vote, despite President Obama's efforts to achieve bipartisan support for the bill.

The final vote was 244 to 188. No Republicans voted for the bill, while just 12 Democrats voted against it. The Senate is likely to take up the bill next week.

In floor debate earlier, House Democrats offered near-unanimous support for the bill, touting the package's ability to quickly create jobs and jumpstart economic growth.

But Republicans, who are outnumbered in the House, have pushed back, expressing concern about the large amount of spending in the bill, and have criticized the tax cut provisions for not going far enough.
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   US News,   Money,   Current News US,   1 more
  2. tags:
    News and Politics,  Economy,  Barack Obama,  US,  7 more
  3.     
    |

47 comments // House passes $819 billion stimulus bill

  • resolute
  • fun_size
    • 0
      fun_size  

    • I asked my dad a few months back how he thought the US would pay back its national debt. His response: who's gonna make us?

      lol

    • 3 years ago
  • krush_productions
  • ras_menelik
  • digitrash
  • Snuff99
    • 0
      Snuff99  
    • digitrash:

      Why hell no. And that's why I take any opinion I've heard/read on the matter, especially on the interwebz, with a grain of salt. Let the politicians fight it out that's why we vote.

    • 3 years ago
  • dariusvons
  • ras_menelik
    • 0
      ras_menelik  

    • lost in all this Obamabash .......................

      .......GM standing in line for the 3re & 4th time in less than 2 months(as a car & bank Co.)

      when all said and done
      Despite our 1,000's of billions it will still fall!!!

      Priceless.........

    • 3 years ago
  • Alex_French
  • Leonidis
  • Leonidis
  • twodee
  • Leonidis
  • twodee
  • twodee
  • twodee
  • oracleruby
  • WhippieWoHo
  • charfman
  • bishopobispo
    • 0
      bishopobispo  

    • What's this I hear about communism, oiling your guns, and revolutions?

      Hmmmm...

      I guess some people's "patriotism" went out the door along with the credibility of the Republican Party.

    • 3 years ago
  • bansheewail
    • 0
      bansheewail  

    • It is a shame that the GOP can't be honest with the American people about their actions on the Bill. Obama tried to be non-partisan by compromising with the Republicans on a few issues. he took out funding for Plan Parenthood. By all means, let not give poor, out of work people any condoms. (sarcasm) Also, Obama added 300BILLION in corporate tax cuts, just like they asked. And still, not one single Republican voted for the Stimulus package. They had no trouble voting for the Bush/TARP stimulus Bill. And that money went to Wall Street with no oversight. In Obama's Bill the money would go to the Governors in each state to be used to rebuild infrastucture and education. This Bill is a good piece of legislature. If the GOP doesn't want to work together to better our country, Obama doesn't have to include them at all. The Democrats don't need Republican vote to pass a bill. Obama is trying to fulfill his promise of working bypartisanly. The GOP doesn't care what happens to the rest of us.

    • 3 years ago
  • fun_size
  • daboz
    • 0
      daboz  

    • This is no stimulus package, There is no job creation in this bill. This bill is a Democrat wish list of Socialist spending programs that he is going to increase taxes to pay for. You idiots elected an inexperiened Socialist that will drive this country into Depression for the next 10 years. WTG MORONS!!!

      Wait until he forces another trillion throught to pay the UN for its Poverty Program and another trillion on UN mandated GREEN enforcement.

    • 3 years ago
  • cybexg
    • 0
      cybexg  
    • daboz:

      Give it a rest, 1/4 of the deficit created by this bill is DIRECTLY due to the tax cuts it gives to businesses. Almost 1/3 of the total of the bill is tax cuts.

      Also, if you break the bill's payouts into categories (based upon how long of a pay out period it that part will have), you will see that a substantial portion of the bill requires significant time to pay out. This is a classic project management technique intended to reduce risk (if that item isn't working out as intended, you can cut it with much less cost than if it paid out quickly).

      I've reviewed the bill, I've taken the time to try to understand its goals and its flaws. At least I'm not repeating the words of others.

      If you really feel that strong daboz, why not do your own research (and no, going to a bunch of websites doesn't count).

    • 3 years ago
  • WakeUpPeople
    • 0
      WakeUpPeople  
    • daboz:

      What, you didn't notice that we were already in a depression under Bush? Anyone remember their history from the Great Depression? How did we get out of it? That's right... it was called The New Deal, considered by many as socialism, but sure enough, it got us out of the rut. I guess it just goes to show that in hard times it's better for us all to work together for the common good. A stimulus plan that attempts to jumpstart work programs, keep people in their homes and off of the streets, and literally re-energize the country does not sound all that bad.

    • 3 years ago
  • fun_size
    • 0
      fun_size  
    • daboz:

      @ Wakeuppeople

      Sorry to burst your bubble my friend but the New Deal did not end the depression. The mobilization and industrial boom following our involvement in WWII did.

      With that being said, the New Deal did usher in many positive reforms and created many jobs for the unemployed. Above all it brought the people what they needed most at the time, Hope.

    • 3 years ago
  • bkurtz21
  • JStation
    • 0
      JStation  

    • In the matter of this seeming "bailout" bill, we need to put pressure on ensuring that the tax cuts go to those who are in need of them: the middle class and those below poverty lines. The fundamental principal in tax cuts is to give money to those who otherwise would not have it, with the intention of them using it to stimulate sales and debt recovery.

      What I'm not seeing on this bill are the same things I didn't see on Bush's tax cuts: provisions limiting the money to those below a certain income line. For the rich to be getting richer is failing to address the issue. Those who have money and receive more will not go on a much for frivolous shopping spree than they normally would; it's excess cash in their pockets, and they're more than willing to take advantage of the situation.

      What we can look forward to is the lack of Republican support for this bill. The Republicans failed to address the issue with previous tax cuts, and their non-support on this bill can be seen as a sign that things are being addressed outside of the Bush administration's narrow perspective on the situation. I'm none-the-more surprised that the only critical aspect on this bill from the Republican side was the idea that there should be a much higher tax cut. Considering the lack of provisions limiting the funds to those in need, a higher figure for the cut would have put more money in fewer pockets.

      With the Republican party still in shock-and-awe at McCain's loss during the campaign, Obama will find bipartisan support for many of his proposed legislations difficult. By all means, the conservatives on Capitol Hill should consider this an opportunity to change views and win support after what has been coined as the "worst eight years in modern American history". Following Bush's presidency, a Republican win in 2012 will be further difficult due to the fact that both George W. Bush and his father, George H. W. Bush, have left their seats after severely damaging the American economy, and - both, ironically - leaving us in the midst of a war overseas. Liberals have been left to clean up the conservative mess twice within the last 20 years, and the American public had heard the alarm when Obama began campaigning.

      As a final thought: It's ironic that, considering the agenda of conservatives to limit the government, they are quick to enact "moral" laws that restrict our constitutional rights, pass tax cuts that make the wealthy wealthier, and force American families into wars based on more than one fairytale of Saddam and nuclear weapons. With limited hopes, I pray that God may still have a little Conservative Heaven stashed away for them.

    • 3 years ago
  • jawnybnsc
  • discreetlove0
    • discreetlove0  
    • This comment was removed as a violation of community guidelines.
  • neocongo
  • bkurtz21
  • Crossslash_Manasa
  • charfman
  • numinant
  • xmay
  • Elevator
  • neptune_sound
    • 0
      neptune_sound  

    • no it really won't hurt...the US' financial system is meant to incur debt....meaning ....we were meant to be in debt...there can't be money without debt....nice little system these Banks have made us accept as "normal"...the more they print out...the more the fed/int. banks make....pure and simple...

    • 3 years ago
  • neocongo
  • daboz
  • charfman
  • furryjenn
    • 0
      furryjenn  

    • let's face, will we ever pay back the trillions we owe ot the Fed Reserve? Nope.
      I guess a few billion won't hurt.....right? haha.

      hey as long as we get the unemployed their jobs back! we need to help those in need or else we will see murder-suicides all over the country.

    • 3 years ago
  • nkeg87
    • 0
      nkeg87  

    • Do we even have that kind of money to use to stimulate the economy?

      And this bill is more wasteful than the millions of dollars that went to alcohol and wooden arrows from the $700 billion one?? Give me a fucking break.

    • 3 years ago
  • IonHand
  • courage
  • charfman
  • ras_menelik
more from News and Politics:
from the community

top videos