Obama touts conservative spending approach

WFAA.com (AP) ^ | February 28, 2008

[keepitreal]

AUSTIN - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama strayed onto Republican turf in Texas, agreeing Thursday with a core GOP principle: Be conservative when it comes to federal spending.

"I am a progressive, but I always tell people that if you're a progressive you should be fiscally even more conservative than the so-called conservatives," he said. "The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need."

Obama was answering a question from a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative during a town hall meeting about the economy.

"It's important to me, not only because it makes our economy more vulnerable when we've racked up these kinds of debts, but also because if we can't get our fiscal situation under control now it's going to be a lot worse in 10 to 20 years," Obama said. Carl Stolle, 48, the Austin resident who asked the question, said it's not always easy to find a fiscally conservative Democrat to support. But the retired technology executive, who has already voted for Obama and plans to caucus for the first time Tuesday night, said he was pleasantly surprised by Obama's thorough response.

"I loved his answer," Stolle said. "I thought it was reasonable and practical and I thought he had the right priorities. I was impressed with how thorough he was."

[keepitreal]

This is laughable. Further in the speech he argues that universal health care actually SAVES the government money!

[kromike]

Sure, he'll save money with a Kucinich-style budget:

Gut the military completely.

[Salvation]

How did Sen. Obama vote in the Senate? Pork-barreling, I bet?

[LdSentinal]

HUSSEIN Obama will make sure every child has a Koran.

[A. Morgan]

What a LOAD of BS! Obama is FULL of IT!

[Gabz]

"The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need."

Translation:

"The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, such as expanding handouts to those who don't contribute anything except Democratic votes, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need, such our military and other wasteful national security items."

Gotcha, buddy boy.

[macamadamia]

there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need

[bahblahbah]

http://www.gop.com/obamaspendometer.htm

Obama is all things to all men.

[Always Right]

Obama’s National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank Will Cost $60 Billion Over Ten Years; Equal To $6 Billion A Year And $24 Billion Over Four Years. Obama: “I’m proposing a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will invest $60 billion over ten years.” (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks On Economic Policy, Janesville, WI, 2/13/08)

Obama’s Health Care Plan Will Cost Up To $65 Billion A Year; Equal To $260 Billion Over Four Years. “[Obama] campaign officials estimated that the net cost of the plan to the federal government would be $50 billion to $65 billion a year, when fully phased in, and said the revenues from rolling back the tax cuts were enough to cover it.” (Robin Toner and Patrick Healy, “Obama Calls For Wider And Less Costly Health Care Coverage,” The New York Times, 5/30/07)

Obama’s Energy Plan Will Cost $150 Billion Over 10 Years, Equal To $15 Billion Annually And $60 Billion Over Four Years. “Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid.” (Obama For America, “The Blueprint For Change,” www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/14/08, p. 25)

Obama’s Tax Plan Will Cost Approximately $85 Billion A Year; Equal To $340 Billion Over Four Years. “[Obama’s] proposed tax cuts and credits, aimed at workers earning $50,000 or less per year, would cost the Treasury an estimated $85 billion annually.” (Margaret Talev, “Obama Proposes Tax Code Overhaul To Help The Poor,” McClatchy Newspapers, 9/19/07)

* Obama’s Plan Would Raise Taxes On Capital Gains And Dividends, And On Carried Interest. Obama’s tax plan includes: “[i]ncreasing the highest bracket for capital gains and dividends and closing the carried interest loophole.” (Obama For America, “Barack Obama: Tax Fairness For The Middle Class,” Fact Sheet, www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/8/08)

Obama’s Economic Stimulus Package Will Cost $75 Billion. “Barack Obama’s economic plan will inject $75 billion of stimulus into the economy by getting money in the form of tax cuts and direct spending directly to the people who need it most.” (Obama For America, “Barack Obama’s Plan To Stimulate The Economy,” Fact Sheet, www.barackobama.com, 1/13/08)

Obama’s Early Education And K-12 Package Will Cost $18 Billion A Year; Equal To $72 Billion Over Four Years. “Barack Obama’s early education and K-12 plan package costs about $18 billion per year.” (Obama For America, “Barack Obama’s Plan For Lifetime Success Through Education,” Fact Sheet, www.barackobama.com, 11/20/07, p. 15)

Obama’s National Service Plan Will Cost $3.5 Billion A Year; Equal To $14 Billion Over Four Years. “Barack Obama’s national service plan will cost about $3.5 billion per year when it is fully implemented.” (Obama For America, “Helping All Americans Serve Their Country: Barack Obama’s Plan For Universal Voluntary Citizen Service,” Fact Sheet, www.barackobama.com, 12/5/07)

Obama Will Increase Our Foreign Assistance Funding By $25 Billion. “Obama will embrace the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty around the world in half by 2015, and he will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to achieve that goal.” (Obama For America, “The Blueprint For Change,” www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/14/08, p. 53)

Obama Will Provide $2 Billion To Aid Iraqi Refugees. “He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe-haven.” (Obama For America, “The Blueprint For Change,” www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/14/08, p. 51)

Obama Will Provide $1.5 Billion To Help States Adopt Paid-Leave Systems. “As president, Obama will initiate a strategy to encourage all 50 states to adopt paid-leave systems. Obama will provide a $1.5 billion fund to assist states with start-up costs and to help states offset the costs for employees and employers.” (Obama For America, “The Blueprint For Change,” www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/14/08, p. 15)

Obama Will Provide $1 Billion Over 5 Years For Transitional Jobs And Career Pathway Programs, Equal To $200 Million A Year And $800 Million Over Four Years. “Obama will invest $1 billion over five years in transitional jobs and career pathway programs that implement proven methods of helping low-income Americans succeed in the workforce.” (Obama For America, “The Blueprint For Change,” www.barackobama.com, Accessed 1/14/08, p. 42)

Obama Will Provide $50 Million To Jump-Start The Creation Of An IAEA-Controlled Nuclear Fuel Bank. Obama: “We must also stop the spread of nuclear weapons technology and ensure that countries cannot build -- or come to the brink of building -- a weapons program under the auspices of developing peaceful nuclear power. That is why my administration will immediately provide $50 million to jump-start the creation of an International Atomic Energy Agency-controlled nuclear fuel bank and work to update the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.” (Sen. Barack Obama, “Renewing American Leadership,” Foreign Affairs, 7-8/07)

[socalgop]

There’s a logically sound, but wrong chain of thought behind that argument: people that enter emergency rooms to get treatment, or end up being treated once worse and the hospitals simply go unpaid, or the federal gov’t picks up the tab. So, universal health insurance, with an approach to preventative and maintenance care, makes sense because you save money up front.

There’s a practical problem, which is that health programs tend to expand, and entitlement programs tend to get less efficient over time - part of the reason the system functions is that it is relatively hard to see doctors. The bain or mckinsey report a while ago reported part of the reason americans spend so much $$ on health care is that our doctors get paid so much. Driving up demand for health care without expanding supply is going to cause health care to cost more without providing a commensurate rise in coverage.

It could also lead to NHS-style queuing, but I think that is a less likely outcome unless we actually nationalize health care, instead of provide gov’t insurance. The more worrying thing is something we’re already seeing in workplace-provided healthcare: that once the gov’t pays for you, in the name of cost-control they feel freer to dictate to you lifestyle choices. So then the government is telling you what to eat, how to live, etc. Not desirable...

OTOH, as a matter of pragmatic policy, if SOME health care package is going to come about, i’d think it would be better to do something minimal and weak than something maximal, in the hopes of forestalling something that truly ruins the health care market in the states. Hopefully it would be something that shows the american people what a bad idea gov’t intervention is, without destroying the system first.
We needed Carter to make people want Reagan, you know...

[keepitreal]

These are the priorities.

[Fox_Mulder77]

“I am a progressive, but I always tell people that if you’re a progressive you should be fiscally even more conservative than the so-called conservatives,”

1.) Ralph Nader has this guy scared: this is the first time he has called himself a “progressive”.
2.) He doesn’t always tell people anything about progressives, “I always tell people that if you’re a progressive you should be fiscally even more conservative”
He always tells people to hope for change that isn’t liberal but common sense..... now he’s progressive......... give me a break

[org.whodat]

Be conservative when it comes to federal spending

Could anyone point out to me how this is republican turf. Seems to me everyone has spent this rears off the last few years.

[Amendment10]

Where is Obama coming from with his brag about being a conservative spender, if that is what he meant? In fact, some people regard Obama as the biggest spender in the Senate.

http://www.nuwireinvestor.com/blogs/investorcentric/2008/02/presidential-candidate-budget-analysis.html

[popdonnelly]

Hogwash by Obama.

[weegee]

"I am a progressive, but I always tell people that if you're a progressive you should be fiscally even more conservative than the so-called conservatives," he said. "The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need."

Why is it so called Progressives always see SOCIALISM as "progess"?

There AREN'T a lot of needs for what he wants to spend money on (more Federally funded social safety net programs), not according to OUR Constitution. It ISN'T the role of the government.

If Soros only spent HALF of his billion dollar forturne, if Bill Gates on spent HALF of his billion dollar endowment...

The Big Staters could fund privately programs to aid those unable to take care of themselves.

There is no charity in forcing ME to pay for it and there is no constitutional mandate for it.

AND if you end the government mandated welfare state, the illegal immigration problem would take care of itself because there would be fewer handouts available.

Those who wire their paychecks back to Mexico would either keep more of it or migrate back home.

[weegee]

Now THAT’S change I can see!

[CharlesWayneCT]

The reason is, there are a lot of needs where we need to spend money, so we can't afford to waste money on stuff that we don't need."

That's not fiscal conservatism. That's running out of money.

[Anti-Hillary]

You got that right. Check out his own words on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl32Y7wDVDs

[JSDude1]

This guy (the technology exec for Obama) is NUTS, as are many yuppie-genx-baby boom businessmen that are taken in by the democrats: Barak Obama is for “more of the same”-He’s about as fiscally conservative as most of the blue-dog-Democrats.