President Obama urged lawmakers to quickly approve nearly $50 billion in emergency funds

I cant help but wonder if this administration is purposely TRYING to bottom out the American Dollar.
www.washingtonpost.com...

By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 13, 2010

President Obama urged reluctant lawmakers Saturday to quickly approve nearly $50 billion in emergency aid to state and local governments, saying the money is needed to avoid "massive layoffs of teachers, police and firefighters" and to support the still-fragile economic recovery.

In a letter to congressional leaders, Obama defended last year's huge economic stimulus package, saying it helped break the economy's free fall, but argued that more spending is urgent and unavoidable. "We must take these emergency measures," he wrote in an appeal aimed primarily at members of his own party.

The letter comes as rising concern about the national debt is undermining congressional support for additional spending to bolster the economy. Many economists say more spending could help bring down persistently high unemployment, but with Republicans making an issue of the record deficits run up during the recession, many Democratic lawmakers are eager to turn off the stimulus tap.

"I think there is spending fatigue," House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said recently. "It's tough in both houses to get votes."

Democrats, particularly in the House, have voted for politically costly initiatives at Obama's insistence, most notably health-care and climate change legislation. But faced with an electorate widely viewed as angry and hostile to incumbents, many are increasingly reluctant to take politically unpopular positions.

The House last month stripped Obama's request for $24 billion in state aid from a bill that would extend emergency benefits for jobless workers. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) hopes to restore that funding but with debate in that chamber set to resume this week, he acknowledges that he has yet to assemble the votes for final passage. Obama's request for $23 billion to avert the layoffs of as many as 300,000 public school teachers has not won support in either chamber.

Mixed signals


Senior Democratic congressional aides said those initiatives have not gained traction in part because the White House has not made additional spending on the economy a clear priority.

In recent weeks, for instance, the White House has appeared more intent on cutting spending -- threatening to veto a defense bill over a jet engine project that the Pentagon views as unnecessary and urging every agency to come up with a list of low-priority programs for elimination. Obama has also proposed a three-year freeze in discretionary spending unrelated to national security, an idea endorsed by leaders of both parties at a meeting at the White House last week, according to Obama's letter.

With the letter, however, Obama makes a direct and unequivocal case for additional "targeted investments," including state aid and several less-expensive initiatives aimed at assisting small businesses. He specifically calls for passage of the measure that is before the Senate, which would extend unemployment benefits and offer states additional aid, increasing deficits by nearly $80 billion over the next decade.

Obama asks lawmakers to be patient on the deficit, noting that a special commission is at work on a comprehensive deficit-reduction plan.

"It is essential that we continue to explore additional measures to spur job creation and build momentum toward recovery, even as we establish a path to long-term fiscal discipline," Obama wrote. "At this critical moment, we cannot afford to slide backwards just as our recovery is taking hold."

In an interview, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said the letter is intended to settle the growing debate over the opposing priorities of job creation and deficit reduction and "where you put your thumb.

[edit on 13-6-2010 by monkeySEEmonkeyDO]

[edit on 13-6-2010 by monkeySEEmonkeyDO]

I could understand this action if
the Feds were responsible for the
cleanup, but they are not.

Make BP cover this costs, don't push
that debt liability for the cleanup on
American taxpayers.

Obama is asking the public to pay
for this.

My vote is a resounding NO !!!!

All this is, is a bail-out for BP !!!

Force BP to pay for it or
start seizing their property here
in the US and freezing their banking
accounts. Obama you gotta get tough
with these bastards, if not they're
gonna $h!+ all over you and the
American people.

Take the federal bank and make it into a really federal one, your problems will be solved. This whole economy thing is because of them and they have also increased their account shown assets from billions to trillions after the economic collapse. Not to mention the properties they added to their via other banks because of people failing to repay the loans because of this collapse. I wonder what the real assets of federal bank are.

[edit on 13-6-2010 by chaosinorder]