Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2009 > February > 10 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USIsakson and Chambliss explain their votes against the Obama stimulus package
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
No doubt you’ve noticed that the U.S. Senate has passed a stimulus package on a vote of 61 to 37, with three Republicans supporting $838 billion measure.
As they indicated over the weekend, U.S. Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss voted against it, and issued a joint press release in explanation:
“This legislation is yet another example of Congress throwing money at the symptoms but not getting to the root of the problem,” Isakson said. “While there are some good provisions in this bill, it is primarily spending money on programs that should not be categorized as stimulus and will not do anything to help our economy. Funding studies of global warming or re-seeding the Capitol lawn aren’t going to stimulate anything.”
“Instead of focusing on three major issues - job creation, housing and compassion for Americans who have lost jobs through no fault of their own - to boost the economy, this bill has morphed into a bloated government giveaway,” said Chambliss. “The majority in Congress has been in runaway mode when it comes to spending taxpayer dollars. This legislation is yet another sign that Washington is more concerned with pet projects than with the welfare of taxpayers.”
In an interview with my AJC colleague Bob Keefe, Chambliss said he wished Obama well. “I hope it works. But if we get six to eight months down the road into this fall and we don’t see a major improvement in the economic conditions in this country,” he said, “we’re going to have all this money obligated out there.”
In their press release, the senators cited Isakson’s proposal for a $15,000 homebuyer credit, which remains in the bill. The Wall Street Journal has a short but intelligent analysis of the tax credit’s prospects:
It’s far from certain that the House will accept the Senate version, which includes far more generous credits. The House version would modify an existing $7,500 credit so that it wouldn’t have to be repaid, while the Senate goes much further by doubling the credit, removing income limits, and extending it to existing homeowners, from just first-time buyers.
The Senate version would also benefit more upper-middle income buyers. The current credit is refundable, which means that even those who pay little to no income tax could receive a government check, while the Senate credit is nonrefundable, so that buyers only stand to gain if they pay federal income taxes.
Services »
Comments
By Ralph
February 10, 2009 4:14 PM | Link to this
nothing but the same old BS from these out of touch relic fossils of the Georgia GOP delegation. Man, can they get any dumber or what? Spending stimulates the economy, any 5th grade student can figure that one out. BUt then again, I doubt Johnny and Saxby made it past the 5th grade on a intellectual basis.
By N.J.
February 10, 2009 4:27 PM | Link to this
Normally, I would simply reply, “same circus, different clowns”
But alas for Georgia, its “Same circus, same clowns”
A year ago, the team of Bush/Bernanke passed a stimulus bill that was all tax cuts, 2/3rds in tax rebates between 300 and 1200 dollars, the rest as targeted tax incentives to encourage businesses to spend. We were assures that this would prevent a the coming recession, that had already arrived, but which this team would not admit
Didnt work.
last fall, Bush Bernanke asserted that a huge stimulus package to bail out banks would get credit flowing again.
Didnt work.
The only real option left is government spending which these two and other Republicans rail against, but which is just like any other spending. It goes into the same public market as private sector money would if we could be 100 percent certain that the private sector would actually spend it. Republicans assert that this might happen, but they cannot assure it WILL happen.
The only thing that will get the economy expanding again is if someone starts buying goods from American companies that sell then, or purchases the services of American companies that offer them.
The government can assure this, even when it is so called “pork spending”.
By Old Vet
February 10, 2009 4:59 PM | Link to this
Saxby and Johnny do not run in the same circle as the common, ordinary working people so they do not personally know anyone who is hurting from this recession.
By the time either are up for election again most will have forgotten they voted against the stimulas. Even if it’s remembered by the voters, all old Saxby has to do is tell the Georgia voters that his opponent is a librul and bingo, re-elected again.
By Jiminy C
February 10, 2009 7:02 PM | Link to this
They need to be sentenced to a term on any small town Georgia City Council, County Commission or Board of Education so they will understand that this is about real problems and real people, not about keeping the good opinion of Rush Limbaugh.
By Matt Jennings
February 10, 2009 7:18 PM | Link to this
Iskason and Chambliss, like their compadres Gingrey, Westmoreland, Broun, Linder, Deal, Price, and Kingston, are extremists who can’t get it into their heads that conservatism and it’s “tax cuts for the rich solve everything” mantra have failed, so they look for any excuse not to support something else, even if it amounts to 1% of a bill.
By Tirshata
February 10, 2009 8:24 PM | Link to this
I did not vote for Chambliss because I didn’t want the “same old” thing. Chambliss and Isakson don’t get it. They don’t understand about living from paycheck to paycheck.
Isakson’s main concern was to make sure they put “grits” back on the menu at the prayer breakfast in Washington, DC last week. Go figure!
By David
February 10, 2009 9:39 PM | Link to this
Yes, if the right manages somehow to block this package— then the new great depression is the price we will have to pay— for the extinction of the republican party… hey, it may be worth it…
By Sherry
February 10, 2009 10:18 PM | Link to this
I support the decision of Chambliss and Isakson not to support this spending bill that contains so many projects that will do nothing to jump start the economy, but will saddle our children and grand children with tremendous debt. This bill is about expanding government and it’s control over private citizen’s lives. I am not opposed to government spending to help the economy, but this bill is not the correct solution to the problems we face.
By dmac
February 11, 2009 6:49 AM | Link to this
Chambliss claims that the vast majority of the people who call his office don’t want him to support the stimulus bill.
By the looks of the postings here, none of you folks call his office.
By Cassandra
February 11, 2009 6:55 AM | Link to this
Isakson is so against deficit spending that he voted no on the stimulus bill, but not before packing on his $35 billion amendment. A 15,000 tax credit may help some get into a home, but it won’t keep them there if they join the growing ranks of the unemployed. This market is a qualified buyer’s dream – do we really need more incentives to buy? I thought the problem was getting folks to stay in their homes. Isakson’s vote is hypocritical at best, and dubious (as the former president of Northside Realty) and worst. As voters we need to hold officials accountable for inaction as well as poor decisions. It is not acceptable for the GOP to complain from the sidelines, while offering no solutions.
By Copyleft
February 11, 2009 8:20 AM | Link to this
The Republicans have to pray for the economy to get worse. If it improves, then their party is doomed for another twenty years.
By Sarah
February 11, 2009 8:53 AM | Link to this
Wasn’t it about a year ago that stimulus checks were sent out to “tax payers”..by the way my sister recieved one and she has never payed taxes nor worked a day in her life, but she does have kids and recieve welfare, guess what, stimulus checks didn’t work!
Can’t do the same thing and expect different results.
Oh and, How does 110 million dollars spent on reduces the hazards of Lead paint create Jobs?
Btw, I voted for Obama.
I’m starting to regret my decision, should have voted third party.
By GA VALUES
February 11, 2009 10:17 AM | Link to this
Sissy Saxby didn’t say a word back in 2003 when Dick Cheney declared, “Deficits don’t matter.”
By Concerned Citizen
February 11, 2009 12:46 PM | Link to this
Maybe you should read the stimulus package. It does nothing to create jobs. Suggest those of you who support the package as is pay close attention to what is really happening in it. It is nothing more than a spending bill. Maybe they could announce every job that is created and tell you what the job is, where it is, what it pays and most importantly, how long it lasts and whose pocket does it line. The President is scaring the b’jesus out of people and is moving this country towards a more socialist government and if we don’t pay attention as citizens of this great country, no one will want to live here. And for those of you who continue to say it’s this party or that party, who cares. We have problems and they need solutions. It doesn’t matter who created them or who solves them. Let’s just hope and pray for the good of all that they are solved. In the mean time, pay attention, close attention because you may well get exactly what you’re asking for.
By Aaron Burr V. Mexico
February 11, 2009 3:22 PM | Link to this
I’ve spotted a new conservative trick involving pretending to read a bill and then saying, “Have you read it?!”
I’m sorry, but if you expect me to trust the expertise of someone who thinks that Tax Cuts can make water out of wine or cure cancer, then you’re sorely mistaken.
Just because you ran your eyes over 400 pages in 400 seconds doesn’t mean you ‘read’ anything.