« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

White House advises Senate to not lead in an election year

Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) asked Ben Bernanke at the recent Senate Budget Committee if the lack of Presidential leadership was hurting the US economy. He asked, “I’m afraid President Obama has just been phoning it in here the last couple years in terms of our debt and deficit issue. … Can you speak to how harmful that is in terms of economic growth?”

Now Bernanke can’t answer these sorts of things straight away. But he basically got there. Here’s what he said:

Well Senator, I’m not going to comment on parliamentary maneuverings, but Senator Wyden made exactly the same question. You know, is uncertainty about the future of the tax code, government programs, and so on a negative for growth? I think it is because firms like to have certainty, like to be able to plan. And again I would take on the same responsibility as a regulator, that we need to make regulations as clear and as effective as possible.

So he’s saying that firms like to have certainty and that as a regulator, Bernanke wants things to be clear and effective. Today Jake Tapper asked Jay Carney about this. Should Senate pass a budget? Does the President have an opinion on this? Turns out that the answer is no

TAPPER: The White House has no opinion about whether or not the Senate should pass a budget? The president’s going to introduce one. The Fed chair says not having one is bad for growth. But the White House has no opinion about whether –

CARNEY: I have no opinion — the White House has no opinion on Chairman Bernanke’s assessment of how the Senate ought to do its business.

I think it is worth recalling why the Senate stopped passing budgets. Because they are politically difficult, and being accountable is hard in an election year. The Senate last passed a budget on April 29, 2009. They didn’t work on a budget in 2010. Why? Because a budget requires taking responsibility for the fiscal state of our country. And it was clear that the 2010 election was going to be rough for Democrats. So what did they do? They ducked. They dodged all responsibility. Republicans were willing to do it in the House, but the Senate was not. They didn’t even bring a serious budget to the floor and haven’t since.

And since the Republicans have been able to put their ideas up for inspection by the American people. See the Ryan Budget. Republicans are willing to fight an election on ideas and tell the American people what sacrifices will need to be made to address our fiscal crisis.

But now, not only is the Senate failing the American people, but President Obama is helping the Senate in dodging this responsibility. The fact is that he has no opinion on running the country like an adult. He has “no opinion” about giving business certainty.

Thank you Ron Johnson for asking the question and getting the clarity on this from Chairman Bernanke. And thank you to Jake Tapper for asking the White House if they are interested in leading.

They aren’t.

 

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • calivancouver

    …that maybe the reason that the senate doesn’t get anything done and contributes massively to uncertainty, is that the Republicans fillibuster everything? the response isn’t ‘the democrats fillibustered some stuff in the bush years tooo!’

  • johnt

    As we approach the three year mark on absent responsibility the abdication of constitutional responsibility on the part of Boy Obama and his corrupt cohorts in the Senate is turning into one of America’s greatest political scandals.
    Perhaps a few headlines & a few TV news leads would help, but that would require a media less corrupt than the Democrats.
    We are stuck with human trash all around.

  • avagreen

    trying to subvert it and its laws….like this is news.

    Read here about how Mexican gangsters/cartel members are now raising $$ for obama.

    SOMETHING IS REALLY REALLY REALLY FISHY WITH THIS ! This story has everything! MEXICO, OBAMA, CALDERONE, politics, violence and 1998 QUASHED INDICTMENT? WEIRD?

    * Out of the blue, beginning last fall, Pepe?s brothers, who live in Chicago, became big fundraisers for President Obama ? achieving what is called the ?bundler? status. In total, the family gave to the President and the DNC about $200,000 in legal donations. What is odd about this is that no one had heard of the brothers before in political circles and then just suddenly showed up and they were raising money in big, big ways. [Note that since the NYT started sniffing around about Pepe's family's donations, the Obama campaign has said it will return the donations.]
    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2012/02/07/something-is-really-really-really-fishy-with-this-mexico-obama-calderone-quashed-indictment-weird/

  • babykaboomer

    …but compared to three years without a budget, a split infinitive is small potatoes.

  • Scope

    Norquist just told Piers Morgan that the new conservatism is all about who leads the House and Senates. He said clearly that the government isn’t about the president, and him leading with policy. He said that the only role of the president is to sign legislation passed. I’m paraphraising here, but that was his jist. Any chance we can get rid of this radical muslim supporter anytime soon? I noticed he lost mush of his radical muslim scheduling at CPAC this year.