Sen. Nelson: Senate’s compromise bill has ‘adjustments downward,’ not ‘cuts.’
Sen. Nelson: Senate’s compromise bill has ‘adjustments downward,’ not ‘cuts.’
In his column today, Paul Krugman rips “proud centrists” such as Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Ben Nelson (D-NE), who fashioned the Senate’s compromise recovery legislation. That “compromise” includes slashing aid to schools and states that was originally in the House package. Today on MSNBC, Nelson played semantics, claiming that the “cuts” were really just “adjustments downward”:
Q: Do you agree, or how do you respond to Paul Krugman in the New York Times who said that centrists have done their best to “make the plan weaker and worse?”
NELSON: Well, first of all, they’re not cuts. Let’s just get that up front. These are adjustments downward from numbers that were offered by the House in their version and by the Senate in its version.
Watch it:
Nelson’s compromise bill provides 12 to 15 percent fewer jobs than the House legislation. Yglesias notes that Nelson helped cut one of the “least-controversial and most highly-stimulative provisions, deciding that that was a good place for ‘adjustments downward.’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
NELSON: Well, first of all, they’re not cuts. Let’s just get that up front. These are adjustments downward from numbers that were offered by the House in their version and by the Senate in its version.
Can anyone explain why Ben Nelson considers himself a Democrat?
He votes like a Republican. He talks like a Republican. I thought for a moment that it was because he doesn’t wear a flag lapel pin, but he appears to have that as well.
So what is it? Do Senate Democrats have better barbecues?
February 9th, 2009 at 12:06 pmThe wide world of semantics.
If I heard that I would have just laughed.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pmOh, excuse us Senator, for our linguistic ineptitude…
February 9th, 2009 at 12:07 pmIn a better world:
NELSON: Well, first of all, they’re not cuts. Let’s just get that up front. These are adjustments downward from numbers that were offered by the House in their version and by the Senate in its version.
RESPONSIBLE JOURNALIST: Can you explain the difference, Senator, between “cuts” and “adjustments downward”?
NELSON: “Adjustments downward” sounds nicer.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:11 pmBen Nelson is now and always has been a DINO. I am hoping that the Democrats target him in his next election. He really does need to go.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:13 pmCuts are just adjustments downward and that sandwich you’re eating isn’t peanut butter, it’s a shit sandwich, moron.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:15 pmAnd of course “work” isn’t “jobs” either. Arrggghhhh.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:16 pmTYPO ALERT! in the post.
Nelson is a (D-NE)and NOT an ‘R’—though he is acting like one.
Nelson deserves to have his low-hanging fruit adjusted downwards.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:17 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
If the Senate is split 49/49, why are we being feed (R)ushpublicans?
.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:18 pmNelson and other ‘Centrists’ should be ‘adjusted downward’ by voters who have watched an economic stimulus package turn into a pig sty free for all.
Adjusted downward the last 8 years has included…
-Personal freedoms
-Freedom of ideas
-Bipartisanship
-Food quality
-Food safety
-Objective media
-Military integrity
-Definition of Torture
-Union / Worker rights
-MPG
-Honesty in government
-Trust in American Institutions
-Banking regulations
-Stock Market regulators
I could go on, but you get the point.
Nelson’s IQ has been adjusted downward…
February 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pmBen will be on his way out once his term is up.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:21 pmTechnically, Nelson is right. A cut would result in a decrease in current funding. A downward adjustment to the bill lowers the amount of increase in future funding.
That said, Nelson still voted for a weaker stimulus package. Once there is a stimulus bill of some kind passed, I want another and another and another increased spending bill to be presented. I want the Republicans to either vote for or actually filibuster. Come on, Congress. Obama is doing his part in the change we voted for – it’s your turn.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:23 pmDoe any of you recall when I mentioned that Obama would have more trouble getting an agenda past the DINOs and the BlueDawgs than getting it past the Pukes?
That he didn’t have enough of a mandate to push his stuff through a hostile legislative environment? That he couldn’t count on the Dims to support him?
How’s that ‘political capital’ account holding up?
February 9th, 2009 at 12:23 pmRalphL In a better world:
RESPONSIBLE JOURNALIST: Can you explain the difference, Senator, between “cuts” and “adjustments downward”?
In a MUCH better world:
RESPONSIBLE JOURNALIST: “Senator, if you reduce someone’s taxes it is called a cut. If you reduce funding that is called a cut.:et’s just get that up front.”
February 9th, 2009 at 12:25 pmRemember learning how Nero fiddled while Rome burned? Well, our Neroes, are the folks that will not get this stimulus bill passed so that America might have a little chance of things improving.
This is totally not Barack Obama’s fault. He has certainly tried.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:26 pmThis isn’t a blog post, this is just me typing some stuff and clicking on “Submit Comment”.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:27 pmUm, yeah…
Senator Nelson, we don’t buy that shit from Republicans, and we’re not buying it from you.
Get lost.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:28 pmtokin librul Says:
Doe any of you recall when I mentioned that Obama…
_________
Do any of you CARE what tokin says?
***crickets***
Didn’t think so.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:30 pm“adjustments downward” = “time horizon”
More bullshit for the lame bullshitters.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:31 pmSo, according to Mr. Nelson, getting laid off is simply a “job adjustment”.
Ah. I see.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:33 pmPat Lib Christian: Technically, Nelson is right. A cut would result in a decrease in current funding. A downward adjustment to the bill lowers the amount of increase in future funding.
YOu are both correct and wrong :D. The House said we need X dollars. Nelson said Ill give you less than X.
Its a cut of the house bill number. Real money or still imagined it;s still a cut from the original proposal.
He’s avoiding the term to avoid its negative associations.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:34 pmLeftside Annie Says:
So, according to Mr. Nelson, getting laid off is simply a “job adjustment”.
____________
And if someone dies, does just mean their life has been downsized?
February 9th, 2009 at 12:35 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
I knew YOU’d remember…
February 9th, 2009 at 12:35 pmtokin,
February 9th, 2009 at 12:43 pmDINOS have been a major concern of just about everyone here for years.
Perhaps losing one’s job, house and dignity is merely a socio-economic downward adjustment. Well, Senator DINO, I truly wish you a retirment in a cardboard box in downtown Miami.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:43 pmBen Nelson, you don’t represent Democrats – you think you are being responsible, but it is people like you who are being used by the opposition. You must get back to your Democratic constituents and support them – forget dealing with Republicans – they will stab you in the back – you will be ignored when they can’t use you, and you will lose your Democrtic support in the end. It is a no-win situation for you.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:43 pmtokin librul Says:
tokin thinks this is over……shows how little you really know. This game has barly begun….
Get back with us after the republicans change thier tune or are tied to it’s failure.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:43 pmAll these obstructionists are simply posturing, in preparation for the next presidential election.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:44 pmI like your analogy, leftside Annie.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:45 pmI don’t like Sen. Nelson, but I think that his distinction is apt. Rhetorically we have a tendency to use the most harsh language to describe policy changes that we don’t like.
A budget “cut” is when the budget of an agency goes down. If a budget is slated to increase, does lowering the amount of its increase amount to a “cut”? Does holding a budget steady from year to year so it falls back versus inflation amount to a “cut”? Here, a budget item has been adjusted before it was even passed. It seems a little absurd to call it a “cut” quite yet.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:46 pmI like your analogy too, Republicof Stupidity.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:46 pmThank you, Marie. I like TRoS’s @22 as well.
~A
February 9th, 2009 at 12:46 pmSadly, there’s a lesson in political reality to be had. Ben Nelson is by far the most conservative democrat in the senate…but compare his voting record to that of Johanns (still a freshman) or much of Chuck Hagel’s. It’s Nebraska…Nelson’s about as “progressive” as the state gets.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:47 pm5th Estate Says:
He’s avoiding the term to avoid its negative associations.
Absolutely! But then the word “cuts” is, IMHO, to closely tied with the Republican mantra “tax cuts”. I prefer we use our own language, such as “Nelson is opposed to a powerful stimulus to rescue the economy. He only wants to approve a band-aid when a blood-transfusion is required.” People with HMO insurance will get the analogy (a two-fer in my view).
February 9th, 2009 at 12:47 pmToo bad Senator Nelson isn’t gay, we could have Daryll in here mouthing off…
February 9th, 2009 at 12:48 pmWhile we are debating about the stimulus bill, money is leaving out the back door and the tax payers are obligated to help over $9.7 trillion for all total baillous.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aGq2B3XeGKok
Someone pay attention to the backdoor!
February 9th, 2009 at 12:48 pmThose weren’t cut to the testicles they were adjustments downward.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:06 pmQ: How do you respond to critics who point out that your entire point relies on a bunch of doubletalk?
NELSON: Well, first of all, it’s not doubletalk. Let’s just nip that one in the bud. What I’m doing when I’m talking about these things is called using “truth alternatives.” But it’s not like I’m lying or anything. I’m just using a truth alternative.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:07 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
tokin librul Says:
Doe any of you recall when I mentioned that Obama…
_________
Do any of you CARE what tokin says?
Nope, nada, don’t think so. Never have and never will.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:09 pmI said if before Krugman, they are bullies picking on the most vulnerable. Centrist is definitely the wrong term for them. Please everyone let’s get more appropriate descriptive language going for these phonies.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:12 pmWhen did tokin pothead turn into captain obvious?
February 9th, 2009 at 1:20 pmTHE ENEMY WITHIN……………………
Republicans are practicing forms of demagoguery and guerrilla obstructionism that are intended to destabilize our economy for purposes of political exploitation. Republicans AREN’T making a sincere effort to stop the bleeding their incompetent leadership and failed policies created. Instead, they are using conflicting economic theories as a smokescreen to conceal their real agenda, which is to undermine President Obama and cause him to fail. Republicans are professing their disgraceful political whoring had nothing to do with the banking, real estate, stock market and employment failures that resulted. Republicans are shamelessly trying to block the success of Democratic governance, which is a concerted effort to further damage America, rather than undo or fix its problems. Republicans are offering up subjective controversial arguments they know no one can agree on in order to disrupt and deny constructive change. They want political gridlock for strictly PARTISAN POLITICAL purposes. That’s how they gained power and that’s how they’re trying to retain it. I don’t see them as being the loyal opposition. I see them as an ENEMY WITHIN whose political ambitions have distorted their moral and ethical standards to the point that treachery and betrayal are their preferred weapons of choice. It’s one thing for Republicans to stand up for their conservative beliefs; it’s another thing entirely to deliberately sabotage our government because a successful America would not be vulnerable to the fears and hatreds that created and sustained Republican extremism.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:20 pmAnd the fact is Benny that economists agree that the bill has to be large enough to actually stimulate the economy. The Repukes with your help will adjust it downward enough that it will no longer work ensuring their political futures. Thanks for helping them at the expense of the people.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:23 pmosage,
the Repubs are just taking a page out of Tip O’Neill’s playbook of obstructionism when Reagan was Prez…
Opposition is just that – Opposition
February 9th, 2009 at 1:31 pmPLChristian: I prefer we use our own language, such as “Nelson is opposed to a powerful stimulus to rescue the economy. He only wants to approve a band-aid when a blood-transfusion is required.
Very good analogy.
However, very respectfully, you’re losing the actual plot and going off on a tangent.
‘WE‘ aren’t involved in this conversation–it’s between a DINO and a muffin-brained bobble-head. If you’d been a guest on, or the host of, this segment we (Americans)would be much better informed and we Democrats would be much better-off!
Sadly, you weren’t invited to that discussion.
Still….at least you are here at TP, and that’s a good thing. Cheers!
February 9th, 2009 at 1:36 pmpathetic. Everything is not black and white. Opposition to something that will actually help the contry is more than just opposition. You have to have a political agenda that doens’t include the welfare of the nation to be an obstructionist….
remember, the gop was the minority opposition party for 60 years……obstruction comes when you are still hanging by a thread to the votes to stop progress and you use it even if it is harmful……to appear to be viable….to hope to be still a player in the game.
the gop is the obstructionist party.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:41 pmYou’re right Fred – it’s not black and white… sometimes in the blogosphere that’s what sticks – but it is deeper than that.
I am just wondering – I want you folks who are so passionate about this to explain to me how spending and loaning $9.7 Trillion is going to save the economy.
Can anyone point to an example in history where something like that worked?
February 9th, 2009 at 1:43 pmWhat is the personal wealth of Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Ben Nelson (D-NE)? Becase they seem to have NO idea of what is happening right now in the American economy.
Since Christmas, three friends of mine, all over 50 years of age and each one with a graduate degree in the physical sciences, and with children in college, has lost their job. When you start sheding white collar jobs like skin cells you are in deep water.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:51 pmYou know the examples and you know that they worked.
Why don’t you tell me when tax cuts for the rich and deregulation ever stimulated an economy?
February 9th, 2009 at 1:51 pmI’m not here to defend those you oppose…
I am here to learn why transfering that much money from the citizens to the out-of-touch members of government and their cronies is going to get everyone their job back and make everything ok.
Read this story… it is unbelievable how much of our money our government wastes…
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aGq2B3XeGKok
They have been on an orgiastic spending spree since the 1930’s and it hasn’t worked.
“That government is best which governs LEAST”
-Henry David Thoreau
February 9th, 2009 at 1:57 pmIf you’re not here to defend those that I oppose then why are you so critical of a proposal that is the exact opposite of a recently failed policy?
Just the fact that you imply that this is taking money from citizens and putting it into the hands of government officials and thier cronies tells me you don’t know and don’t want to know what is in this bill.
How does cutting education from the bill benifit America. It would help us keep teachers paid and encourage more teachers. It will help us in the long run too.
How is that not stimulating to an economy where we are falling behind in technology?
February 9th, 2009 at 2:11 pmNobody wants to take a shot at it?
Come on, if you are all so certain the Stimulus Package will work, please show me a specific historical example of when it has worked before.
February 9th, 2009 at 2:11 pmWe’re not here to answer to you. You have an obvious agenda and you know the answers. They just don’t fit your model. Too bad.
You have already shown that you are not interested in a discussion. Rather you want us to make statements that you can attempt to shred with rush talking points. Not interested.
If you want to make a statement of your opinion I would be glad to reply, otherwise, you are just an annoyance.
You offer no solutions of your own and yet you feel free to criticize anyone who has an idea that doesn’t fit your right wing idiology of economics……..
February 9th, 2009 at 2:17 pmFred,
I am not critical of the proposal, per se, as much as I am opposed to such a huge role for the government in our lives. I am not a Republican, as most of you have thought. I am a Libertarian – opposed to Big Government taking our money and spending it how they see fit.
I am not opposed to paying teachers – I am opposed to the teachers unions who get the kickbacks for supporting the Dems and I am opposed to the rich fat cats who get the tax breaks from the Repubs in return for their support.
The whole system is broken – we need to wipe the slate and start over again. The people you care about – those at the end of the line who you want to help, are not getting the help – much of the money is being wasted by the beauracracies.
That is why I am against this spending spree – because it won’t accomplish what they promise – they wrap it up in nice words and phrases so we can feel good about helping those in need.
In my experience, it just doesn’t work that way.
February 9th, 2009 at 2:21 pmOK – I am not offering ideas? Here are 10.
1. Throw all the senators and congressmen out today, shut down the government until new elections occur.
2. Ban lawyers and bankers from running for elective office.
3. Ban ALL political contributions and outlaw ALL lobbying events and activities.
4. Go back to having the state governors appoint their state’s two U.S. Senators, who may only serve two terms maximum (12 years) with a limited stipend instead of a pension.
5. Institute Term Limits for members of the House of Representatives at 4 terms (8 years) with a limited stipend instead of a pension.
6. Eliminate all government spending and programs except for those agencies that protect and defend our country (military, CIA, Border Patrol, etc…), deal with foreign embassies (State Dept.) or handle monetary policy (The Treasury).
7. Give people over 65 their lifetime entitlement of Social Security and Medicare in a one-time payout. The rest of us who have paid into it will have to accept that our money is gone (which it actually is anyway – it has already been spent). Beginning Jan 1, 2009, eliminate FICA and Medicare taxes.
8. Reform the House of Representatives so that each House District consists of 75,000 voters (instead of 700,000 it is today). This would give us a House of 4,000 Representatives – making the House actually represent the People and not Special Interests.
9. Implement a Fair Tax on Goods and Services. Eliminate income taxes, capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes, corporate taxes and all other forms of taxation. On an estimated Private Sector Consumption of $11 Trillion (85% of $13 Trillion GDP in 2007), a 7.5% tax would generate $825 Billion for the Government. The Defense budget in 2006 was $625 Billion.
10. Add an Amendment to the Constitution requiring a balanced budget except in times of national emergency or war. (National debt stands at almost $10 TRILLION!!! Annual Interest on the debt is $312 Billion!!!)
February 9th, 2009 at 2:27 pmRe. DontTreadOnMe2009:
1. forget the whole Constitution thing, right?
2. stereotyping and prejudice are so American, right?
3. capitalism is dead, so no one has to pay for campaigning, right?
4. that concept of representative government is quaint, right?
5. term limits have really helped us retain the best representation, right?
6. we don’t need no stinkin’ environmental, food, worker, or child protection agencies, right?
7. eliminate the most successful program (SS) ever, right?
8. capitalism is dead, so we won’t have to pay for each of these representatives and there’s no way that that won’t lead to more “pork”, right?
9. so the poor’s wealth will be disproportionately tax in comparison to the rich’s, right?
10. so, all a president or Congress has to do is declare a war and, poof, there can be an unbalanced budget and that worked out so well the past eight years, right?
Right? right-wing, but very wrong.
February 9th, 2009 at 2:46 pmFred,
Canada has used defficet spending many of times. If uesd correctly, the economy will progress ahead.
Remember, the trick to a capital system is too keep the money in circulation. This is the reason for this mess….there is no money in circulation.
Draw a circle about 10″ in diameter and then draw another circle about 1″ in diameter. NOW LOOK AT THE BIG CIRCLE…THATS DEBT…LOOK AT THE SMALL CIRCLE…THATS MONEY IN CIRCULATION. You tell me how everyone in the big circle is going to feed off of the 1″circle????? YOU CAN’T!!!!
That is what the MSM is not telling us. Because we send TRILLIONS of dollars overseas, we have no money circulating in the US. We send close to 2trillion of our money overseas. But if we stopped that…we would kill FREE TRADE (as we should) and that would mean corporations would make less money. So there theory is falling apart and the corps know this. Hence we get bailouts.
Obama is right…if we don’t stop the spiral downwards, you can’t stop it period. DEFLATION IS THE GOVERNMENT WORST NIGHTMARE….WHICH HAS STARTED.
Pass the stimulious package and beging working on the next package…HOW TO STOP OUR DOLLARS FROM GOING OVERSEAS!!!
February 9th, 2009 at 2:51 pmWell,
If you are content with being ruled by a tyrrany of corrupt, tax-dodging, bribe-hungry, out-of-touch, arrogant bureaucrats – you’re welcome to it.
This is not what the Founders had in mind.
Lawyers and Bankers have a conflict of interest – they pass laws and tax codes that are so cumbersome that we have to hire them (or members of their firms) to untangle it for us. Thus they guarantee themselves hefty paychecks after they “serve” us – and if it doesn’t work that way, then they can always be a paid lobbyist (even their spouses can!!!)
You okay with that?
February 9th, 2009 at 2:54 pmI’d like to tell Congress:
You’re pay hasn’t been cut, it’s been “adjusted downward.”
February 9th, 2009 at 2:56 pmHow can you say that Social Security is the best system ever with a straight face – or maybe you actaully didn’t have a straight face when you typed it?
February 9th, 2009 at 3:00 pmIf it’s soooooooo good, then why do my parents and everyone I know on SS have to purchase Supplemental Insurance?
And if you are under 45 and expect the money to be there when you reach 65 (or more likely they will push it back to 75 by then) – well, good luck to ya.
For me, I’d rather have the 7.65% in my pocket every month to invest how I want – at least I know I’d get it back with interest.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:06 pmHey buddy,
I am not a GOP-er – back the F**K off
February 9th, 2009 at 3:08 pmIs your entire world black and white HateFacts?
Maybe you should try switching to Zoloft
February 9th, 2009 at 3:21 pmLibertarians (like DontTreadOnMe) imagine themselves to be completely independent of everyone else. They all think they are Anontonio Banderas on a Harley.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:23 pmLibertarians (like DontTreadOnMe) imagine themselves to be completely independent of everyone else. They all think they are Antonio Banderas on a Harley.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pmoops.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pmHateFacts,
You’re having a panic attack – calm down, huh?
After reading the ranting, ill-supported, profane comments – well, it’s no wonder why our country and our government in particular is so screwed up.
Yelling and screaming from the Rush-dittoheads matched by the yelling and name-calling from the Socialistas here.
Nice – thanks for doing your part to f**k my country up.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm5th estate,
That was soooo witty that you had to post it 2x…
did make me laugh though – yeah, I guess we do look a little odd to you so-called progressives…
I guess it is dumb to believe in a government of the people, by the people and for the people…
Probably too pedestrian for you sophisticated-types
February 9th, 2009 at 3:39 pm“Tax income is deposited on a daily basis and is invested in “special-issue” securities. The cash exchanged for the securities goes into the general fund of the Treasury and is indistinguishable from other cash in the general fund”
From the SSA website – http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#n1
Feel safer about your money now? Backed by the “full faith and credit of the US Government”
Oh – I feel safe now – NOT
February 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pmSocialism is a viable concept….the completly free of regulations free market economy is a bust…..evidence the last 8 years.
Calling us socialists does not hurt our feelings but your ideas are completly bankrupt. Your idea is constructive destruction which was also botches plan….how are you different? You want to tear it down and start over.
There is a lot of anger out there and if you don’t want to see or hear it, don’t expose yourself to it by coming here and telling us that our ideas won’t work when they have been proven to work……..also, your ideas mostly are for 3rd world countries and might be viable if we keep listening to you.
February 9th, 2009 at 3:55 pmThere, there RHF… let it all out now…
I have never seen someone act like this when they have won the national debate – you’ve got the votes to do whatever you want – and you are screaming like a stuck pig. Now I’d expect that from the GOPers out there, but not from the “majority” party.
Maybe you and your brownshirts should just round us moronic hillbilly’s up and shove us in a gas chamber – would that quench your vile anger?
I’m guessing it would…
February 9th, 2009 at 7:06 pmThe DINO Nelson needs to go!
February 9th, 2009 at 8:13 pmSomeone needs to tell Nelson that the Dems won the last election, and his state gave one of its three electoral votes to Obama.
I don’t think he knows.
I don’t think he knows much of anything.
February 10th, 2009 at 12:10 amNelson needs to send his resume to georetown and get a job with that other bucket of manure Hagel. Constitutional malfeasance is a serious crimial offense and this guy is GUILTY!
February 11th, 2009 at 12:26 am