Politics Blog

Politics of the day!

  • Categories

Is the GOP Anti-Olympics?

Posted by jhr4us on October 2, 2009

 

 

<div><iframe height="339" width="425" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/33110767#33110767" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 425px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">Breaking News</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">World News</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">News about the Economy</a></p></div>

.csharpcode, .csharpcode pre
{
font-size: small;
color: black;
font-family: consolas, “Courier New”, courier, monospace;
background-color: #ffffff;
/*white-space: pre;*/
}
.csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; }
.csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; }
.csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; }
.csharpcode .str { color: #006080; }
.csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; }
.csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; }
.csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; }
.csharpcode .html { color: #800000; }
.csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; }
.csharpcode .alt
{
background-color: #f4f4f4;
width: 100%;
margin: 0em;
}
.csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Is the GOP Anti-Olympics?

Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties – Capitol Hill- msnbc.com

Posted by jhr4us on April 28, 2009

 

Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties

The move pushes Democrats closer to total control of the U.S. Senate

Video

Republican Sen. Arlen Specter To Announces Switch To Democratic Party

Specter to run as a Democrat
April 28: Veteran Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter announces his intention to switch from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party.

MSNBC

Video: Capitol Hill 

Questioning the GOP’s future
April 27: Only about 21 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans. MSNBC’s Ed Schultz and a political panel discuss how the number of people who believe in the GOP is smaller than the number of people who believe in ESP. What does this mean for the party’s future?


GOP now blaming the media

GM’s viability plan

‘It’s Barack Obama’s town’

INTERACTIVE

Track President Barack Obama’s promises
Explore and track the president’s campaign pledges. See if Obama keeps his word, and vote on his progress during the first 100 days.

NBC News

INTERACTIVE

Discuss the latest political news
Get political at Newsvine.  Read, rate and discuss the latest developments.

Slideshow

The Week in Political Cartoons
Msnbc.com’s political cartoonists take a look back at the past week.

more photos

BREAKING NEWS

NBC News and news services

updated 9 minutes ago

WASHINGTON – Veteran Republican Sen. Arlen Specter announced plans Tuesday to switch parties, a move that will push Democrats closer to total control of the U.S. Senate.

Specter’s switch is a huge boost for President Barack Obama as he tries to advance his agenda on energy policy, health care reform and other issues.

With 60 votes in the 100-seat chamber, Obama’s fellow Democrats could stop Republican filibusters — stalling tactics used to delay or defeat legislation.

Story continues below ↓


advertisement | your ad here


Specter would give Democrats at least 59 Senate seats. There is one vacancy from Minnesota, where Democrat Al Franken holds a narrow lead in a race still being disputed in the courts.

Under Senate rules, a single senator can object to consideration of a bill, in which case it takes a 60-vote super-majority to bring a bill to the floor or to end debate so a final vote can be taken.

However, there is no guarantee that the Pennsylvania senator will vote with the Democrats on every issue. With the presence of moderate Democrats and contested regional issues, the risk of a fractured caucus is a congressional reality.

"In our caucus we don’t have any automatic votes for anything," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy. "I expect him to be as just as independent as ever."

"Anyone who says the president’s agenda can slide right through here is wrong," added New York Sen. Charles Schumer. "But the really good news for us is that the Republican sort of knee-jerk filibuster at every whim cannot happen."
Political philosophy at odds
In a statement, Specter said, "I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

"It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable," he added.

Several Senate officials said a formal announcement could come later in the day or on Wednesday. Specter planned a news conference for Tuesday afternoon.

Specter, 79, and a veteran of 29 years in the Senate, is one of a handful of Republican moderates remaining in Congress in a party now dominated by conservatives.

Several officials said the White House as well as leaders in both parties had been involved in discussions leading to his move.

Specter faced an extraordinarily difficult re-election challenge in his home state of Pennsylvania in 2010, having first to confront a challenge from his right in the Republican primary before pivoting to a general election campaign against a Democrat.

"I am unwilling to have my 29-year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate," he said in the statement.

"I don’t have to say anything to them. They’ve said it to me," Specter said, when asked in a Capitol corridor about abandoning the Republicans.

‘Let’s be honest…’
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele responded to the switch in a statement, saying, "Let’s be honest — Sen. Specter didn’t leave the GOP based on principles of any kind. He left to further his personal political interests because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record."

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, called Specter’s move, " the height of political self-preservation."

There were kinder words from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: "I welcome Sen. Specter and his moderate voice to our diverse caucus, and to continuing our open and honest debate about the best way to make life better for the American people."

Vote and discuss

Why did Specter switch parties?

"Sen. Arlen Specter is one smart senator," added Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. "He is an independent thinker of the type that the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they conceived the office of U.S. senator."
100 days
Specter’s move came a day before Obama’ marked 100 days in office.

A senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because no announcement has yet been made, said Obama was handed a note while in the Oval Office during his daily economic briefing.

The note said: "Specter is announcing he is changing parties." A few minutes later, Obama reached Specter by phone and told him "you have my full support" and that the Democratic Party is "thrilled to have you."

Specter had publicly acknowledged that to win in 2010, he would need thousands of Pennsylvania voters who switched from Republican to Democrat last year in order to vote for Obama to now flip back to the Republicans to cast ballots for him.

Powerful panel positions
As one of the most senior Republicans in the Senate, Specter held powerful positions on the Judiciary and Appropriations panels. It was not clear how Democrats would calculate his seniority in assigning committee perches.

Click for related content

First Read: Continuing Specter coverage

Specter has long been an independent Republican, and he proved it most recently when he became one of only three members of the Republican party in Congress to vote for Obama’s economic stimulus legislation.

As recently as late winter, he was asked by a reporter why he had not taken Democrats up on past offers to switch parties.

"Because I am a Republican," he said at the time.
NBC’s Ken Strickland contributed to this report.

More from msnbc.com

How to complain about credit report errors
Best swine flu strategy: Stay away, everyone
Quiz: What do you remember about the first 100 days?
Cool car technologies you can’t have now
Slideshow: Pontiac through the years

© 2009 msnbc.com

  MORE FROM CAPITOL HILL 

Congress advancing much of Obama’s budget

Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties

Congress advancing much of Obama’s budget

Official: Harman wasn’t monitored by NSA

Obama told Sen. Reid, ‘I have a gift’

GOP lawmakers: Release interrogation records

Measuring Congress’ success over 100 days

Democrats push for interrogation probe

Chrysler still seeking to avoid bankruptcy

Brief scare at White House, Capitol

Democrats near agreement on budget

Capitol Hill Section Front

Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties – Capitol Hill- msnbc.com

Posted in 2009, Democratic Party, GOP, Politics, Sen. Arlen Specter | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Veteran GOP Sen. Specter switches parties – Capitol Hill- msnbc.com

Outlook on Economy Is Brightening, Poll Finds – NYTimes.com

Posted by jhr4us on April 8, 2009

 

Outlook on Economy Is Brightening, Poll Finds

Article Tools Sponsored By

By ADAM NAGOURNEY and MEGAN THEE-BRENAN

Published: April 6, 2009

Americans have grown more optimistic about the economy and the direction of the country in the 11 weeks since President Obama was inaugurated, suggesting that he is enjoying some success in his critical task of rebuilding the nation’s confidence, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Skip to next paragraph

Multimedia

Poll ResultsGraphic

Poll Results

Views of the PartiesGraphic

Views of the Parties

Complete Results: New York Times/CBS News PollInteractive

Complete Results: New York Times/CBS News Poll

Related

How the Poll Was Conducted (April 7, 2009)

The Economy’s ‘Green Shoots,’ Real or Imagined

Room for DebateWhat are the bright spots in the economy, if any?

Post a Comment »

Blog

The Caucus

The Caucus

The latest on President Obama, the new administration and other news from Washington and around the nation. Join the discussion.

These sometimes turbulent weeks — marked by new initiatives by Mr. Obama, attacks by Republicans and more than a few missteps by the White House — do not appear to have hurt the president. Americans said they approved of Mr. Obama’s handling of the economy, foreign policy, Iraq and Afghanistan; fully two-thirds said they approved of his overall job performance.

By contrast, just 31 percent of respondents said they had a favorable view of the Republican Party, the lowest in the 25 years the question has been asked in New York Times/CBS News polls.

It is not unusual for new presidents to enjoy a period of public support. Still, the durability of Mr. Obama’s support contrasts with that of some of his predecessors at the same point in their terms. It is also striking at a time when anxiety has gripped households across the country and Mr. Obama has alternately sought to rally Americans’ spirits and warn against economic collapse as he seeks Congressional support for his programs.

The poll found that 70 percent of respondents were very or somewhat concerned that someone in their household would be out of work and looking for a job in the next 12 months. Forty percent said they had cut spending on luxuries, and 10 percent said they had cut back on necessities; 31 percent said they had cut both.

For all that, the number of people who said they thought the country was headed in the right direction jumped from 15 percent in mid-January, just before Mr. Obama took office, to 39 percent today, while the number who said it was headed in the wrong direction dropped to 53 percent from 79 percent. That is the highest percentage of Americans who said the country was headed in the right direction since 42 percent said so in February 2005, the second month of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The percentage of people who said the economy was getting worse has declined from 54 percent just before Mr. Obama took office to 34 percent today. And 20 percent now think the economy is getting better, compared with 7 percent in mid-January.

“It’s psychology more than anything else,” Arthur Gilman, a Republican from Ridgewood, N.J., said in a follow-up interview to the poll. “President Obama has turned around the negative feeling in this country. He’s given everything an impetus because he’s very upbeat, like Roosevelt was. It’s too soon to tell if the spending stuff works, but some things have improved.”

Frank Henwood, an independent from Amarillo, Tex., said: “Hopefully, the stock market has bottomed out and is on the rise. Once the stock market shapes up, I think the economy will come back, and then jobs will come back and people will start buying automobiles made in America.”

With the poll finding that an overwhelming number think the recession will last a year or more, Mr. Obama may find he has a deep well of patience to draw on. The poll found that he shoulders virtually none of the public blame for the economic crisis: 33 percent blame Mr. Bush, 21 percent blame financial institutions, and 11 percent blame Congress.

By more than three to one, voters said they trusted Mr. Obama more than they trusted Congressional Republicans to make the right decisions about the economy. And by more than two to one, they said they trusted Mr. Obama to keep the nation safe, typically a Republican strong suit. Nearly one-quarter of Republicans said they trusted Mr. Obama more than Congressional Republicans to make the right decisions about the economy.

“As far as acting like adults and getting things done, the Democrat Party has done better,” said Rachel Beeson, an independent from Wahiawa, Hawaii. “The Republican Party seems to have decided that they are going to turn down anything that comes out of the White House, and nothing will get done that way.”

The poll showed signs of continued political division: 57 percent of people who said they voted for Senator John McCain in November said they disapproved of Mr. Obama’s performance. While Mr. Obama’s budget proposal enjoys the support of 56 percent of Americans over all, sentiments splinter along party lines: 79 percent of Democrats said his budget had the right priorities, compared with 27 percent of Republicans.

The survey was conducted Wednesday through Sunday, while Mr. Obama was in Europe for the Group of 20 summit of the world’s largest economies. Two-thirds of respondents said leaders of other countries had respect for Mr. Obama; when a similar question was asked in July 2006, 30 percent of respondents said foreign leaders had respect for Mr. Bush.

The national telephone poll was conducted with 998 adults. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Even as Americans strongly support Mr. Obama, they do not necessarily support all of his initiatives. For example, 58 percent disapprove of his proposal to bail out banks. But the percentage of respondents who said they thought it would benefit all Americans, rather than only bankers, jumped from 29 percent in February to 47 percent now, signaling that the White House might be making progress in changing perceptions of the plan.

And as Mr. Obama has proposed a vast expansion in spending and programs, 48 percent of Americans said they preferred a smaller government providing fewer services, while 41 percent preferred a bigger government with more services.

Americans remain concerned about the growing national debt being passed on to future generations, but in the face of the current economic troubles, they are divided over whether it is necessary to increase debt. Forty-six percent said the government should not incur further debt, but 45 percent said the government should spend money to stimulate the economy even though it would increase the budget deficit.

Amid evidence of a surge of populism in response to abuses on Wall Street, respondents said by more than two to one that Democrats cared more about the needs of people like themselves than Republicans did. Seventy-one percent of Americans said Mr. Obama cared more about the interests of ordinary people than about large corporations.

Mr. Obama’s push to increase income taxes on people making over $250,000 a year was supported by 74 percent of respondents. When presented with the possibility that taxing those in the higher income bracket might hurt the economy, 39 percent of those polled still backed the plan.

Marjorie Connelly and Marina Stefan contributed reporting.

More Articles in US » A version of this article appeared in print on April 7, 2009, on page A1 of the New York edition.

Outlook on Economy Is Brightening, Poll Finds – NYTimes.com

Posted in Democrat, Democratic Party, Politics, President Obama, Stimulus | Comments Off on Outlook on Economy Is Brightening, Poll Finds – NYTimes.com

Bush Deficit

Posted by jhr4us on March 6, 2009

 

Posted in Debt, Deficit, Surplus | Tagged: , , | Comments Off on Bush Deficit

YouTube – Broadcast Yourself.

Posted by jhr4us on March 6, 2009

YouTube – Broadcast Yourself. 

bustosricky (2 weeks ago) Show Hide

Marked as spam

| Spam

go ask bush and see if he is willing to pay it. matter of fact why don’t you go and ask the whole RNC to see if they are willing to repay all their spending in the last 8 years and give people who lost their houses in the economic meltdown a place to live?
5 trillion dollars in 8 years… that was the entire national debt since the US began more than 230 years ago. bush took 233 years and doubled it in only 8. but hey, lets go after the guy trying to fix the mess.

YouTube – Broadcast Yourself.

Posted in Comments, Debt | Tagged: , | Comments Off on YouTube – Broadcast Yourself.

Obama’s Backing Raises Hopes for Climate Pact – NYTimes.com

Posted by jhr4us on March 1, 2009

Obama’s Backing Raises Hopes for Climate Pact – NYTimes.com

Posted in global warming, Obama | Tagged: , | Comments Off on Obama’s Backing Raises Hopes for Climate Pact – NYTimes.com

Kansas Governor Accepts Offer as Health Secretary – NYTimes.com

Posted by jhr4us on March 1, 2009

 

Kansas Governor Accepts Offer as Health Secretary – NYTimes.com

Posted in Health Care, Health Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius | Tagged: | Comments Off on Kansas Governor Accepts Offer as Health Secretary – NYTimes.com

A first look at Obama’s budget proposal – Los Angeles Times

Posted by jhr4us on March 1, 2009

A first look at Obama’s budget proposal – Los Angeles Times 

A first look at Obama’s budget proposal

Low- and middle-income workers will see tax cuts, with hikes for the wealthy.

By Frank James
February 27, 2009

Reporting from Washington — President Obama’s $3.55-trillion budget proposal includes tax cuts for some and increases for others. More details are expected in April.
Here’s a first look.

Who would get a tax cut under the plan?
The budget would make permanent the Making Work Pay tax credit for low- and moderate-income earners. Single taxpayers are eligible for a $400 credit; married couples filing jointly are eligible for double that.
The credits phase out for individuals who make $75,000 or more and for couples making $150,000 or more.

The tax credit, meant to offset some or all of a worker’s payroll taxes, was signed into law for two years as part of Obama’s economic stimulus package. The budget would make it permanent.
For small businesses, the capital gains tax would be eliminated.
Whose taxes would go up?
Bush administration tax cuts for the highest-earning taxpayers, such as families earning more than $250,000 a year, would be allowed to expire in 2011. The highest income tax rate would revert to 36% for individuals and 39.6% for married couples, from the current high of 35%.
The Obama budget also would reduce the rate that the highest-earning Americans use to determine their itemized tax deductions. Currently, wealthy Americans get to write off 35 cents for every dollar of their deductible expenses. Obama would reduce that to 28 cents.
That would include deductions on mortgage interest.
Capital gains taxes on the highest-earning Americans would increase to 20% from the current 15%.
Clint Stretch, managing principal for tax policy at Deloitte, crunched the numbers and determined that under the president’s plan, a single person with no children with $500,000 in household income would pay an additional $19,200 in taxes. A married couple with the same income and two children under 17 would see a tax increase of $11,300.
What about businesses?
Many businesses would also see their taxes rise. The administration wants to raise about $210 billion over 10 years by tightening tax enforcement for U.S. companies with international operations and tax policy reforms.
Oil and gas companies would see their taxes rise about $31.5 billion over a decade as the administration eliminated various tax preferences and placed an excise tax on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
Another big change would affect hedge funds whose managers’ incomes are now taxed at the lower capital gains rate of 15%.
Obama would make their earnings taxable at the ordinary income tax rate, raising $23.9 billion over 10 years.
And administration officials estimate the cap-and-trade system that the administration would implement to reduce businesses’ greenhouse gas emissions — not technically a tax — would raise $645.7 billion over 10 years.
What was the reaction to the tax changes specified or implied by the president’s budget?
Liberal advocacy groups welcomed the changes and praised the budget for addressing healthcare and global warming.
Congressional Republicans decried the changes, saying raising taxes on the highest-income earners would harm small businesses and job creation, especially during a time of deep recession.
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who withdrew his nomination as Obama’s Commerce secretary-designate over differences with the president on the stimulus, said the cap-and-trade program would affect everyone in the country.
“You’ve got a tax on people’s electric bills here. Everybody who gets an electric bill in this country who happens to be in a region where there are coal-fired plants or other plants subject to a carbon limitation tax, they’re going to be getting a big tax on their energy bills,” Gregg said.
fjames@tribune.com

A first look at Obama’s budget proposal – Los Angeles Times

Posted in 2009, Budget, Obama | Tagged: , | Comments Off on A first look at Obama’s budget proposal – Los Angeles Times

Live Blog: Obama’s Address to Congress – The Caucus Blog – NYTimes.com

Posted by jhr4us on February 25, 2009

Live Blog: Obama’s Address to Congress – The Caucus Blog – NYTimes.com 

February 24, 2009, 8:33 pm

Live Blog: Obama’s Address to Congress

By Kate Phillips

Stephen Crowley/The New York Times President Barack Obama addressed a joint session of Congress.

Wrap Up | 11:34 p.m. President Obama walked out of the House chamber a short while ago, breaking into a grin now and then, while being swarmed by elected officials seeking his autograph and his hand on the way out.

If his mission tonight, as some had suggested and as aides had acknowledged, was to be realistic but reassuring, well, even Republicans were praising his performance.

“He brought his A-game tonight,” Senator John Ensign, Republican of Nevada, told Carl Hulse, our chief congressional correspondent. Mr. Ensign said he liked this speech better than the inaugural address.

And if you were monitoring congressional reaction on Twitter, as our Michael Falcone was doing, here would be some highlights from a few key members:

Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, and an obsessive congressional tweeter wrote that the show of mutual respect, even affection, between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton as the president entered the House chamber tonight “makes me proud of our democracy.” She added: “What a difference a year makes.”

On the other side of the aisle, Representative John Culberson, Republican of Texas, threw some sharp criticism Mr. Obama’s way, complaining that the president’s policy on bank loans “sounds like nationalization – very bad news.” He also took issue with the president’s call for Congress to pass legislation that would put a market-based cap on carbon emissions: “Get ready for your light bills to go even higher through the roof w carbon cap and trade Lieberman bill.” But even Mr. Culberson acknowledged the historical nature of the address: “This is always an awe inspiring experience no matter who is President – we celebrate our Republic and our great institutions tonight.”

Another Republican, Senator Mel Martinez of Florida, noticed a policy omission from the president’s remarks: “POTUS speech in re energy – He campaigned on nuclear, but totally absent from agenda.”

Representative Earl Blumenauer, Democrat of Oregon, was one of the president’s loudest cheerleaders throughout the speech. “Won’t accept a future where jobs and industries take root beyond our borders!!! This is the over arching theme.” A few minutes later: “Call to arms on healthcare reform. He means it!” And the eagle-eyed Mr. Blumenauer also noticed this about half-way into the president’s speech: “Some Republican senators are standing and clapping, including McCain. Great!”

But those Republicans may have been in the minority of the minority. As Representative Zach Wamp of Tennessee concluded: “Pres Obama is moving the ‘center’ to the left. We must stand our ground as conservatives. Liberal leaders in Congress threaten freedom.”

Throughout the speech, Mr. Obama stressed that there would always be disagreements over his policies. But tonight he tried again to find a common purpose, as Republicans have said they want too, in economic recovery. This speech seemed a straddle between life coach and lecturer. He gave a somber assessment of tough economic conditions as he tried to tap into the reserves of the American public. There is no time to waste, he urged, after years of individual and collective procrastination on a host of issues.

Early on, he said: “Those qualities that have made America the greatest force of progress and prosperity in human history we still possess in ample measure. What is required now is for this country to pull together, confront boldly the challenges we face, and take responsibility for our future once more.

Now, if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that for too long, we have not always met these responsibilities – as a government or as a people. I say this not to lay blame or look backwards, but because it is only by understanding how we arrived at this moment that we’ll be able to lift ourselves out of this predicament. “

Somehow we can’t get that song with the line “lift me up” out of our heads, but we’ll move on.

On the agenda side, Mr. Obama hit hard on education, health care and energy as his top priorities, but he also lobbed a few light lines – even picking on Joseph R. Biden Jr., his own vice president when he talked about choosing him to oversee stimulus spending: “And that’s why I’ve asked Vice President Biden to lead a tough, unprecedented oversight effort — because nobody messes with Joe,” the president said to big applause. “I — isn’t that right? They don’t mess with you.”

Sheryl Gay Stolberg, one of our White House correspondents, made this more serious observation about the jibe:

“The relationship between President Obama and Vice President Biden is a source of endless curiosity in Washington, as was the relationship between former President George W. Bush and his vice president, Dick Cheney. On several occasions, Mr. Obama has seemed visibly displeased with Mr. Biden, as was the case when Mr. Biden cracked a joke about Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. during a swearing in ceremony for executive branch employees. At his news conference, Mr. Obama was asked about a remark the vice president made suggesting that even if the pair did everything right, “there’s still a 30 percent chance we’re going to get it wrong.’’ Mr. Obama said he didn’t know what Mr. Biden was talking about – “not surprisingly.”

The “nobody messes with Joe’’ line, perhaps, is Mr. Obama’s way of giving a boost to the vice president, who is still trying to define his job in the post-Cheney era.”

Speaking of the No. 2 job, one of the most striking visual changes tonight beyond the presence of President Obama rather than George W. Bush, was the absence of the former vice president, Dick Cheney, from the chair beside Ms. Pelosi.

And that’s it. By now, the gridlock that wraps itself around the Capitol like an external rotunda should have eased up enough to get home.
The Republican Response | 10:20 p.m. Up Now: Governor Jindal of Louisiana to give the G.O.P. response to the president’s address. If he seems a bit stilted, well one explanation could be that he’s not speaking to a live audience in the way that Mr. Obama was, for one. He’s speaking into a camera from his home state.

After trying to draw the similarities between Mr. Obama’s background, and his own (he’s a child of immigrants), the governor then began reciting in a near schoolteacher-like monotone much of the Republican criticisms of the stimulus package and the differences between smaller government and bigger government. But he also falls into mocking, as other Republicans have, some of the initiatives such as high-speed rail that aren’t exactly going to be awarded or constructed without serious competitive bidding among several big projects.

Shaking Hands | 10:15 p.m. Mr. Obama is now making his way through waves of elected officials, shaking hands and patting people on the back, as is his usual gesture. He warmly hugged Senator Tom Coburn, a Republican who has made earmarks and “wasteful spending” part of his mantra.

President Obama is also stopping to grant requests to autograph copies of his speech.

‘Something Worthy to Be Remembered’ | 10:14 p.m. So in closing, the president highlights the resolve of the American people — ending on a somewhat upbeat note:

I know that we haven’t agreed on every issue thus far, and there are surely times in the future when we will part ways. But I also know that every American who is sitting here tonight loves this country and wants it to succeed. That must be the starting point for every debate we have in the coming months, and where we return after those debates are done. That is the foundation on which the American people expect us to build common ground.

And if we do – if we come together and lift this nation from the depths of this crisis; if we put our people back to work and restart the engine of our prosperity; if we confront without fear the challenges of our time and summon that enduring spirit of an America that does not quit, then someday years from now our children can tell their children that this was the time when we performed, in the words that are carved into this very chamber, “something worthy to be remembered.”

Doug Mills/The New York Times President Obama speaking before Congress on Tuesday night.

Not Quitters | 10:05 p.m. Attention Congressman James Clyburn, the House Democratic whip: Mark your calendar for the ground-breaking ceremony at that old school in South Carolina. It’s the one you’ve talked about, too. Recognized by Mr. Obama, the young student next to Mrs. Obama claps solemnly as the president quotes her saying; “We are not quitters. We are not quitters.”

‘Didn’t Feel Right’| 10:03 p.m. That was just the acknowledgment to Leonard Abess, one of the guests sitting with Mrs. Obama, invited by the White House. Mr. Obama uses his story as a direct contrast to the C.E.O.’s who have been castigated for swallowing bonuses and huge buyouts. As Mr. Obama tells it, Mr. Abess, a bank president from Miami, “who reportedly cashed out of his company, took a $60 million bonus, and gave it out to all 399 people who worked for him, plus another 72 who used to work for him. Mr. Abess didn’t tell anyone, but when the local newspaper found out, he simply said, ”I knew some of these people since I was 7 years old. I didn’t feel right getting the money myself.”

Supporting Troops | 9:58 p.m. In recognizing the service of the troops overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mr. Obama reiterated that they have the nation’s “unyielding support.”

And then, as the president shifts into other policy matters regarding national security and terrorism, (the closing of the detention centers at Guantanamo Bay, for example) he forcefully says: “The United States does not torture.”

Doug Mills/The New York Times President Obama addressed Congress Tuesday night.

Check Point | 9:54 p.m. My colleague Micheline Maynard weighs in from Detroit. Early on in this speech, Mr. Obama renewed his commitment to helping the beleaguered, crippled auto industry and ended on a note about not letting down the nation that invented the automobile.

Nope, says Micheline:

President Obama says, “The nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it.” Mr. Obama would get one wrong on the quiz I give my MBA students at U-Mich. The automobile was NOT invented in the U.S. It was invented in Mannheim, Germany, in 1885, by Karl Benz. Better to say, “The nation that perfected mass production of the automobile” since Henry Ford definitely gets credit for that.

On Education | 9:50 p.m. “Right now, three-quarters of the fastest-growing occupations require more than a high school diploma. And yet, just over half of our citizens have that level of education. We have one of the highest high school dropout rates of any industrialized nation. And half of the students who begin college never finish.”

Mr. Obama says, “it will be the goal of this administration to ensure that every child has access to a complete and competitive education – from the day they are born to the day they begin a career.”

“Dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself; it’s quitting on your country. And this country needs and values the talents of every American.”

We’re not sure how some parents and students who can’t afford college right now will react to a president who says they can’t drop out (say, to work) of high school. Or that dropping out lets the country down, as opposed to say, contributing to a family income during a period of high unemployment? That’s not to diminish the goal of lowering the dropout rate.

Must Not Wait | 9:47 p.m. “So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year.”

It is interesting to note that while he speaks about health care reform, the administration is still without a secretary of Health and Human Services. Who will that be? Inquiring minds still want to know. Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has been mentioned as a leading candidate ever since former Senator Tom Daschle withdrew from consideration over his personal tax problems.

Health Care | 9:46 p.m. Nearly everyone is waiting for the president’s health care initiatives, knowing all the while that the expense and the battle will both be bruising. When Mr. Obama mentioned another legislative success of his, signing into law the expansion of children’s health insurance — SCHIP — Mrs. Pelosi jumped to her feet and clapped.

We Interrupt This Address to Congress… | 9:41 p.m. Well, we’re not finished yet but Michael Steele, the new chairman of the Republican Party, has issued his verdict. The Republicans have taken great pains to point out that they would like to work with Mr. Obama while asserting that congressional Democrats are too partisan. The bipartisan debate became problematic for Mr. Obama as it seemed to dilute a message during the stimulus debate. Not one Republican in the House voted for the final package. Only three did in the Senate.

Note the word choice of “young” and also the emphasis again on bipartisanship:

Watching President Obama address our nation – and feeling the pride that is in every American’s heart – it’s worth pausing to celebrate our nation’s achievements. Yet even as we mark this historic event, we recognize the deep problems that continue to face our nation. Republicans are eager to work with President Obama on the challenges he discussed, especially restoring fiscal responsibility and growing our economy.

After last year’s State of the Union, then-candidate Barack Obama asked the nation to imagine a time when a President’s agenda would draw standing ovations from both sides of the aisle. That sort of bipartisanship is an admirable goal – and one that unfortunately continues to elude Washington. The Democratic leadership in Congress must be willing to work with Republicans to stop out-of-control spending, promote the creation of jobs, and to keep our troops properly funded.

Now would be a good time for this young Administration to ask the Democrat leaders in Congress to actually consider working in a bipartisan way to solve the real problems Americans are facing.

The Big Three | 9:39 p.m. Mr. Obama says the budget he will submit will invest in three big items: energy, health care and education. Those are the priorities of the Obama plan.

Deficit Projections | 9:36 p.m. My colleague Jackie Calmes offers up observations about the deficit projections, as Mr. Obama prepares Congress for his upcoming budget plan, which will be presented on Thursday.

She noted: “The Congressional Budget Office projected in January that the deficit for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, would be $1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent relative to the gross domestic product. Mr. Obama has since won passage of a $787 billion two-year stimulus package, some of which will be spent this year.”

It’s About People | 9:30 p.m. Mr. Obama says, “I will not spend a single penny for the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive, but I will do whatever it takes to help the small business that can’t pay its workers or the family that has saved and still can’t get a mortgage.”

“It’s not about banks, it’s about people,” he adds. That stark contrast in words lands Mr. Obama another ovation.

Credit Crisis | 9:30 p.m. How much can be borrowed? Mr. Obama is laying out specifics of new plans, to restore confidence in lending by establishing a new fund. And this segment on housing is intended to reassure homeowners and mortgage-lenders.

Taking Charge | 9:21 p.m. Before he begins talking about his economic recovery plan in detail, Mr. Obama achieves a few things. He managed in this passage to distance himself (and distance himself from the stewardship of) the previous administration and some of past eight years of spending and piling on debt. But he doesn’t lay blame; there’s also a note here of self-determination at the end — of “taking charge.”

In other words, we have lived through an era where too often, short-term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election. A surplus became an excuse to transfer wealth to the wealthy instead of an opportunity to invest in our future. Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn’t afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day.

Well that day of reckoning has arrived, and the time to take charge of our future is here.

Keepsakes | 9:19 p.m. Mr. Biden and Ms. Pelosi seem to want to read along with their copies of Mr. Obama’s address, in their hands and now in their laps. Or maybe they’re just making a mental note that they want it autographed afterward.

‘We Will Rebuild, We Will Recover’ | 9:18 p.m. Mr. Obama receives his first standing ovation after beginning his speech, when he promises: “We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.” This was one of the notes his aides and others said he would hit as he outlined the tough times.

Doug Mills/The New York Times President Obama greeted Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Greetings Madame Secretary | 9:14 p.m. As Mr. obama makes his way down the aisle, he stops specifically to peck Hillary Rodham Clinton — the former rival, former senator and now his Secretary of State, in a special acknowledgment — a kiss hello.

President Obama Arrives | 9:12 p.m. The president enters the House chamber to applause.

Solis and LaHood Arrive | 9:11 p.m. Our colleague Carl Hulse tells us Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, a former Republican congressman, and Representative Hilda Solis, confirmed today as the secretary of labor, were shown a lot of love as they made their entrances.

Watch Along With Us | 9:06 p.m. You can watch President Obama’s address here.

Michelle Obama Arrives | 9:05 p.m. First Lady Michelle Obama has taken her place in her box, without the two Obama girls, Sasha and Malia (9 p.m. is past their stated bedtime). Mrs. Obama is wearing a sleeveless purple dress — we’ll get back to you on the designer. (It sends shivers on our arms, given that it’s been in the 20’s or lower here overnight.)

Mrs. Obama hugged a young girl sitting next to her. Her name is Ty’Sheoma Bethea, an eighth-grader who wrote to the president about her school, the 110-year-old J.V. Martin Junior High School in South Carolina that has become a symbol of falling-down schools around the country that could use stimulus money to be rebuilt.

Stephen Crowley/The New York TimesPresident Obama greeted Justice Ginsburg.

Applause for Justice Ginsburg | 9:03 p.m. Arriving now are the justices of the Supreme Court, including Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who receives a hearty welcome and applause after just returning to the court from being hospitalized with pancreatic cancer, and of course, John Roberts, chief justice of the United States.

Doug Mills/The New York Times Vice President Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Staking Out Seats | 8:55 p.m. The House chamber is quickly filling up. Senators have now arrived en masse from their promenade across the Capitol Building to the House side. Some representatives had been staking out choice seats for hours — if they’re stationed along the aisles they get to shake the president’s hand or receive a shout-out. (A congresswoman who shall remain nameless embarrassed herself a few years back by clinging lengthily to President Bush during one of his final appearances before Congress.)

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is standing in his chair, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi chats with him.

Getting Ready for the Speech | 8:33 p.m. Good evening, everyone.

We’re stationed up here in the Capitol Building, under tight, tight security, awaiting the beginning of President Obama’s speech before a joint session of Congress. It’s going to be a late night, and we’re hoping you stay with us for a while.

The atmosphere has been a bit electric for people on both sides of the aisle up here; building throughout the day as all the accompanying television cameras, officials and guests arrive. Although this is officially not considered an official State of the Union address, those invited to attend do indeed include Supreme Court justices and Cabinet members as well as special guests of top elected officials.

Shortly before 9 p.m., we’ll begin a live blog, not only taking stock of the president’s remarks, but also of insights and observations from our colleagues of the scene and of course, some reaction afterward. (You can follow our updates on Twitter.

So far, we’ve zeroed in today on one key word that keeps popping up singularly – that is, tone — or any of its fitting synonyms. Setting the mood, or altering it altogether, will be one of those themes wafting over the success of this night, no matter the significant substance and goal-setting for economic recovery or the historic nature of witnessing Mr. Obama, the first African-American president, addressing Congress, during a time of extraordinary stress nationwide and overseas.
So that’s what we’ll call the “tone test” for the night. How much will he try to emulate the soldiering-on attitude of FDR or the bright tomorrows of Reagan?

There’s no doubt that Mr. Obama will devote a considerable portion of his speech to the substance of economic recovery – probably pausing to emphasize his success in the passage of the $787 billion stimulus package; his plans to closely monitor bank bailouts (no mention of the latest dreaded word, “nationalization”); and, among other issues, a little more detail on plans to try to rescue the housing/mortgage market.

But among the chattering classes and officials driving some of the most public conversation in anticipation of Mr. Obama’s speech, the overarching coaching notes seemed aimed at what tone, or tenor, he would strike tonight to pull the nation up rather than depress its spirits even more. Given the daily news of markets falling down, banks falling out, houses shuttered, jobs lost, part of Mr. Obama’s mission, in many officials’ minds, must be as the public’s cheerleader.

That could be considered a tough, tall order, or as Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader said today: “The bar keeps getting set higher and higher for him to deliver a good speech.”

And perhaps some of this expectation-setting started when Mr. Obama seemed to suggest two weekends ago that the nation appeared to be in irreversible decline. He retreated from that characterization during his first news conference, but the doom and gloom – evident outside the White House, too – lingered a bit, even into today.

You’ll hear an echo of that tonight, if you hang in there, from Lousiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, 37, and a rising Republican star. Chosen to give the Republican response, Mr. Jindal has already seized upon those “we’re doomed” perceptions, according to advance excerpts of his remarks. “A few weeks ago, the President warned that our nation is facing a crisis that he said ‘we may not be able to reverse.’ Our troubles are real, to be sure. But don’t let anyone tell you that we cannot recover – or that America’s best days are behind her.”

Tone also must’ve been on the mind of former President Clinton, who in an interview with ABC News last week, sounded two ways about the message machine emanating from the White House. While saying he was glad Mr. Obama was offering straight talk to the public, he also coached the new president: “I just would like him to end by saying that he is hopeful and completely convinced we’re going to come through this.”

Well, that didn’t sit so well with the new occupants at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., down the street from us. Robert Gibbs, the press secretary, who snapped in a television interview today: “This president doesn’t need a lecture about hope.” Not even from the man from Hope, we’d add.

Various officials have told us today that Mr. Obama wants to stress how resilient Americans are as a people. And Mr. Gibbs alluded to that, in one of his many TV interviews offering previews today: “He will tell us, tell the country that we’ve faced, as I said, far greater challenges than the ones we face now. But we as Americans always meet those challenges, and in the Reaganesque words, there are always better days ahead.”

We’ll come back to you later, to ask how you think Mr. Obama fared on the tone-o-meter.

Fun Facts: And while we’re waiting, we want to point you to a few historical notes about such addresses, although some of these records were reached during official state of the union addresses. Despite all the comparisons between these tumultuous economic times and the Great Depression, FDR didn’t address Congress until more than a year into his presidency. Congressional Quarterly also offered these facts today: “Presidents George Washington and John Adams addressed Congress, but Thomas Jefferson shunned the practice, contending it was too much like the British monarch going before Parliament.” Woodrow Wilson returned to the practice, more than a century later. Herbert Hoover never appeared.

And if you get bored, and want to read some other presidents’ speeches, the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia offers an archive.

Also — One member of the Cabinet will be left behind tonight and not permitted to attend the address. This time around, it will be Attorney General Eric Holder Jr.

The 44th President, The Caucus, barack obama

Related Posts
From The Caucus
From Around the Web

What’s This?

Powered by Blogrunner


From 1 to 25 of 653 Comments

1 2 327 Next »

  1. 1. February 24, 2009 8:45 pm Link

    The optimistic twist is a nice change, but people – and the markets – till want details. How are we actually going to get out of this mess?

    http://political-buzz.com/2009/02/24/obamas-speech-live-twitter-feed/

    — matt

  2. 2. February 24, 2009 9:09 pm Link

    Not a mention of the absence of Justice Alto. Isn’t this man’s rudeness carrying a bit far?

    — Helen

  3. 3. February 24, 2009 9:25 pm Link

    Republicans remained seated while the rest applauded the stimulus law. Very nice display, y’all.

    Love the purple dress!

    — Gladys

  4. 4. February 24, 2009 9:26 pm Link

    What a stunning change to have an articulate, thoughtful, and intelligent President after 8 years of nothing but the mindless parroting of right wing extremist talking points by an imbecilic cowboy.

    — g english

  5. 5. February 24, 2009 9:28 pm Link

    This sounds like a speech to cover his backside, announce that he inherited the debt, and now tell us how he will cut the deficit by 2012…..an election year coincidentally.

    My daughter is graduating this May. Will that tax credit be too late for me?

    I don’t have Cobra…..his medical unemployment plan won’t help me.

    When I hear people are able to refinance, get jobs, and consumer confidence returns then I’ll be convinced.

    To that end, he is quite correct. What is he leading up to?

    — LadyBeGood

  6. 6. February 24, 2009 9:29 pm Link

    No substance,

    — spike

  7. 7. February 24, 2009 9:35 pm Link

    I’m tired of hearing that banks are “too fearful to lend.” As many as 1,000 banks could fail in 2009 according to one very respected analyst. And banks lack the capital. It has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with zero capital.

    — Alan

  8. 8. February 24, 2009 9:36 pm Link

    Obama’s rhetoric is understandably U.S.-focused, but his speech and plan are short-sighted in that they don’t acknowledge or accommodate free, global markets.

    — John

  9. 9. February 24, 2009 9:37 pm Link

    Same tired rhetoric. Will he still blame Bush in 2012? He has doubled our deficit in a mere 30 days, in that regard he puts Bush to shame!

    What would he do without a teleprompter!

    — Jim

  10. 10. February 24, 2009 9:37 pm Link

    Didn’t the free flow and dependence on credit get us here in the first place? Am I missing something.

    I agree – details? I’m glad for the history lesson but, I’d like to know what’s going to happen today and tomorrow…

    — Ellen

  11. 11. February 24, 2009 9:37 pm Link

    Everybody, please give the man a chance. We didn’t get into the mess overnight, it will take time, nobody complained when George Bush and the rest of the republicans created this mess.

    — Madelyn

  12. 12. February 24, 2009 9:39 pm Link

    Could you give the guy a chance to get the words out of his mouth?

    — Diana

  13. 13. February 24, 2009 9:40 pm Link

    “new american century” -nice dig at the neocons

    — Evan Taylor

  14. 14. February 24, 2009 9:40 pm Link

    I haven’t heard anything concrete. There’s promises, and then there’s plans, and this is all promises. “It is time for America to lead again” sounds like he’s speaking to the lowest common denominator. I’m disappointed.

    — Denis

  15. 15. February 24, 2009 9:40 pm Link

    a lot of smug politicians, grinning with their hands in the till…
    all of our money tossed down the drain…smug politicians applauding again…no shame.

    — dave

  16. 16. February 24, 2009 9:40 pm Link

    I have been holding my breath, waiting for something which will clearly show what that path is which will lead us to this promised land of which he speaks, but there is a sinking feeling in my stomach as he proceeds. Where’s the beef please. Why should Americans keep on buying and buying things which we don’t need, and do it on credit? Why should our system require that kind of idiocy? Can’t we offer the American public something better than credit cards, debts, loans and discounts?

    — Ingrid Bengis Palei

  17. 17. February 24, 2009 9:41 pm Link

    In my town, Frederick, Maryland, BP Solar has decided NOT to expand it’s photovoltaic manufacturing capacity, and instead, leave a new building as a shell.

    Unfortunately, although I’ve pointed this out to the Obama administration, they haven’t been able to fill the gap this reveals.

    That’s the problem: Real solutions are needed for real people locally now! I am very fearful that Obama’s aides do not understand this truth.

    — Bert Gold

  18. 18. February 24, 2009 9:41 pm Link

    Clean, renewable energy!! That is going to be America’s new greatness and Obama is going to lead us to that greatness

    Also, hearing him talk instills in America a sense of hope because he is actually articulate when he talks unlike Bush.

    — Kevin

  19. 19. February 24, 2009 9:42 pm Link

    And GOP thinks Jindal can top this?LMAO Obama is in top form. they are so delusional

    — barbara

  20. 20. February 24, 2009 9:42 pm Link

    RIGHT ON – FINALLY TALKING ABOUT MOVING FORWARD, THE FUTURE, AND DOING THE RIGHT THING. No more doublespeak, reality based on delusion. For those who want details, read the budget and the package. There is detail a-plenty. This a speech designed to show the big picture. OBAMA WASN’T MY FIRST CHOICE, BUT I AM LOVING WHAT I AM SEEING!!!

    — Beth

  21. 21. February 24, 2009 9:43 pm Link

    Accountability sounds great to me. Lets start with ACORN, Fannie and Freddie.

    — LJ

  22. 22. February 24, 2009 9:44 pm Link

    “He has doubled our deficit in a mere 30 days, in that regard he puts Bush to shame! ” (#9)

    What alternative would you suggest besides bankrupting 40% of the country? As long as the government is the only entity willing to invest, it has to do it – especially as the cost of funds is much lower for it than for any business.

    — cobbler

  23. 23. February 24, 2009 9:44 pm Link

    It would make my law school career if the New York Times would start closed captioning these live broadcast videos so I could pay attention in class.

    — CJ Messinger

  24. 24. February 24, 2009 9:44 pm Link

    Obama said America invented the automobile. It did not. Karl Friedrich Benz, a German, invented the auto. I’m just sayin’.

    — Elisabeth

  25. 25. February 24, 2009 9:44 pm Link

    seems like everyone expects miracles and is disapointed that he can’t deliver in one month…the question is “are we headed in the right direction?”… I think we are.

    — Jen

1 2 327 Next »

Live Blog: Obama’s Address to Congress – The Caucus Blog – NYTimes.com

Posted in Obama | Tagged: | Comments Off on Live Blog: Obama’s Address to Congress – The Caucus Blog – NYTimes.com

U.S. Is Pressed to Add Billions to Bailouts – NYTimes.com

Posted by jhr4us on February 25, 2009

U.S. Is Pressed to Add Billions to Bailouts – NYTimes.com 

U.S. Is Pressed to Add Billions to Bailouts

Article Tools Sponsored By

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS, ANDREW ROSS SORKIN and MARY WILLIAMS WALSH

Published: February 23, 2009

This article is by Edmund L. Andrews, Andrew Ross Sorkin and Mary Williams Walsh.

Skip to next paragraph

Multimedia

Adding Up the Government’s Total Bailout TabInteractive Graphic

Adding Up the Government’s Total Bailout Tab

More Buckets Needed for a BailoutGraphic

More Buckets Needed for a Bailout

Today’s Business With Jeff Sommer and Edmund L. Andrews

Related

Across Atlantic, Echoes in R.B.S.’s Lifeline (February 24, 2009)

3rd Rescue Would Give U.S. 40% of Citigroup (February 24, 2009)

New York Financier Picked as Top Adviser on Auto Industry Bailout (February 24, 2009)

Times Topics: Credit Crisis — Bailout Plan

Add to Portfolio

Go to your Portfolio »

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

The government faced mounting pressure on Monday to put billions more in some of the nation’s biggest banks, two of the biggest automakers and the biggest insurance company, despite the billions it has already committed to rescuing them.

The government’s boldest rescue to date, its $150 billion commitment for the insurance giant American International Group, is foundering. A.I.G. indicated on Monday it was now negotiating for tens of billions of dollars in additional assistance as losses have mounted.

Separately, the Obama administration confirmed it was in discussions to aid Citigroup, the recipient of $45 billion so far, that could raise the government’s stake in the banking company to as much as 40 percent.

The Treasury Department named a special adviser to work with General Motors and Chrysler, two of Detroit’s biggest automakers, which are seeking $22 billion on top of the $17 billion already granted to them.

All these companies’ mushrooming needs reflect just how hard it is to stanch the flow of losses as the economy deteriorates. Even though the government’s finances are being stretched — and still more aid might be needed in the future — it is being forced to fill the growing holes in the finances of these companies out of fear that the demise of an important company could set off a chain reaction.

The deepening global downturn is dragging down all kinds of businesses, and, with no bottom to the recession in sight, investors sent the the Dow industrials down 250.89 points, or 3.7 percent, to 7,114.78, a 3.7 percent drop for the day and a loss of about 50 percent from their peak in the fall of 2007. Asian markets followed suit on Tuesday by flirting with the lows they hit last October, with stocks in Hong Kong dropping more than 3 percent, and Japan’s Nikkei 225 index dropping more than 2 percent before rebounding slightly.

In an unexpectedly assertive joint statement after two weeks of bank stock declines, the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve and federal bank regulatory agencies announced that the government might demand a direct ownership stake in major banks that do not have enough capital to weather a deeper downturn. The government will begin conducting a test of the banks’ financial health this week.

Administration officials emphasized that nationalizing any of the major banks was their least favorite solution to the banking crisis, but they acknowledged that some banks might be both too big to fail and too fragile to endure another round of shocks without substantial help.

Banks that fail the test will have to raise additional capital. If they are unable to raise capital in the private market, they would have to take money from the government in exchange for preferred stock that would be convertible into common shares, thus giving the government a bigger stake.

The administration is debating how big a role to play in the auto businesses, what concessions the companies should make in return for aid and whether bankruptcy should be considered, though it prefers a private sector solution.

On Monday, Steven Rattner, co-founder of a private equity firm, the Quadrangle Group, was named an adviser to the Treasury on the auto industry.

As the administration takes bigger stakes in companies, the value held by existing shareholders is being diluted, which could make it even harder to attract private money in the future.

Timothy F. Geithner, the secretary of the Treasury, recently outlined a bank recovery plan that included a program to attract a combination of public and private money to buy troubled mortgages and other assets.

A.I.G. serves as a cautionary note about the difficulty of luring private investors when the size of the losses is unknown. In the months since the government initially stepped in last fall to take an 80 percent stake in the insurer, the company has suffered deepening losses and has been forced to post more collateral with its trading partners.

The company, according to a person close to the negotiations, is discussing the prospect of converting the government’s $40 billion in preferred shares into common equity.

The prototype could turn out to be Citigroup, which is negotiating with regulators to replace the government’s nonvoting preferred shares with shares that are convertible into common stock.

“We absolutely believe that our private banking system is best off being in private hands and we are trying our best to keep it that way,” said one senior administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. But, he continued, the government is already deeply involved in propping up the banking system and may have no choice.

Officials said they were bracing for the possibility of new problems that might indeed require the government to take a more aggressive stance.

“Given our involvement at this particular stage, there is an element, a possibility over time, that we will end up with some ownership of these institutions,” the official said. “This is really about aggressive anticipatory action. It is an acceptance that the future is uncertain, but that we can plan on a certain basis for it.”

Acquiring common stock would give the government more control, but expose it to more risk. Armed with voting shares, government officials would have more power to replace management and change company strategy. But the Treasury would lose its claim to dividend payments, which in Citigroup’s case amount to more than $2.25 billion a year.

A.I.G. declined to provide details of its new financial problems, citing the “quiet period” just before it issues fourth-quarter results. But some people familiar with A.I.G.’s negotiations said it was on the brink of reporting one of the biggest year-end losses in American history.

Such losses lead to a bigger problem. A further credit rating downgrade would force the company to raise more capital, according to a person involved in the negotiations. The losses appeared to be across the board, unlike the insurer’s losses of last September, which were confined mostly to derivative contracts called credit-default swaps.

A.I.G. has not been writing new credit-default swap contracts, and had tried to put the swaps disaster behind it. In November the company worked out a relief package with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in which the most toxic of its swap contracts were put into a kind of quarantine, so they could no longer hurt its balance sheet. But A.I.G. had written several other classes of credit-default swaps, which it kept on its books.

If the latest round of losses severely weaken A.I.G.’s capital and its creditworthiness, then its swap counterparties may be entitled to demand that A.I.G. come up with a large amount of cash for collateral — precisely the problem that brought the company to its knees last September.

“They stand, unfortunately, to bring others down with them if they go down,” said Donn Vickrey of Gradient Analytics, an independent research firm.

The difficulty of shoring up A.I.G. must weigh on the administration at this moment. The administration’s banking statement amounted to a plan of action demonstrating a way to demand a major and possibly a controlling stake in systemically important banks like Citigroup and Bank of America.

“They are desperate to not nationalize the banks,” said Robert J. Barbera, chief economist at ITG. “They know what happened when they took Iraq and they would just as soon not take over the banks, because if you own it, you gotta fix it.”

Eric Dash and Michael J. de la Merced contributed reporting.

More Articles in Business » A version of this article appeared in print on February 24, 2009, on page A1 of the New York edition.

U.S. Is Pressed to Add Billions to Bailouts – NYTimes.com

Posted in Bailouts, Obama | Tagged: , | Comments Off on U.S. Is Pressed to Add Billions to Bailouts – NYTimes.com