Senate Republican Leader offers alternatives for economic stimulus, discusses Sen. Gregg, former Sen. Daschle



WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell appeared on ‘Face the Nation’ this morning. The following are excerpts from the program:



On the President’s original call for a bipartisan, earmark-free bill and the need to ‘exercise some discipline’ on the Democrats’ bill:



“The President indicated he wanted this to be about a bipartisan proposal. I must say that, surely, privately, he's embarrassed about the product that came out of the House. The only bipartisanship was the opposition to it: all of the Republicans and a number of Democrats.”



“I can't believe that the President isn't embarrassed about the products that have been produced so far.”



“Well, the President said he didn't think it ought to have earmarks in it. And you know, earmarks are arguably fine in a normal appropriations process, but what does that have to do with stimulating the economy?”



“I think we need to exercise some discipline here. And I think it may be time, Bob, for the President to kind of get a hold of these Democrats in the Senate and the House, who have rather significant majorities, and shake them a little bit and say, look, let's do this the right way.”



“There's a lot of unease among Senate Democrats about this package, as well. Now, what that obviously sets up is a situation where changes could be made.”



On Republicans’ better ideas (Fix housing first’; Put more money in taxpayers’ pockets):



“We ought to go right at the housing problem and right at tax relief to put money in the hands of consumers who can spend it now. “



“We're going to recommend, for example, that he go right at the housing problem. We have a 4 percent mortgage proposal where creditworthy home buyers could buy down their mortgages or save them, on the average, $5,600 a year.



“Let's fix housing first. That's what started all of this.



“[W]e think we ought to lower tax rates for medium and low-income people. Those two things alone, we think, would go right at the problem, rather than spending money on -- you know, there's $600 million for new cars for federal employees in there and $150 million for honeybee insurance. This is nonsense.”



On the increasing size and unfocused nature of the trillion-dollar spending bill:



“Look, this thing needs to be targeted right at the problem, if we're going to spend this enormous amount of money.”



“Someone said the other day that, if you started the day Jesus Christ was born and spent $1 million every day since then, you still wouldn't have spent $1 trillion. Looking at it another way, it's more than we've spent on all of the wars since 9/11. This is a lot of money. If we're going to spend anywhere near this, Bob, we need to target it directly. It needs to be timely, temporary and targeted.”



“It would be good if it could be smaller and actually put lead on the target immediately. I mean, the whole idea here is to stimulate the economy immediately. And I think we can figure out how to do that. And I think we can do it more effectively with less money than spending $1 trillion, particularly if we're going to waste a significant percentage of it on things that, while they may be very worthwhile, aren't going to spend out until year three or year four, or ought to be handled through the normal appropriations.”



On the potential of Sen. Judd Gregg being named Commerce Secretary:



“Well, it would be a big loss for the Senate. He's one of our brightest, most capable members. The President certainly has an eye for talent. Senator Gregg has assured me that if this were to happen, if it were to happen, it would not change the make-up of the Senate. In other words, whoever is appointed to replace him would caucus with Senate Republicans, so I think it would have no impact on the balance of power in the Senate.”



“Senator Gregg has told me that if he were to take this appointment, it would not alter the make-up of the Senate in terms of the majority and the minority.”



On the nomination of Sen. Daschle:



“In terms of the situation that you described, the Senate Finance Committee is meeting tomorrow to go over this and to come up with recommendations for the rest of us. And I think I'm going to just wait until they give me their

opinion. But it was a surprise. I just found out about it a few days, as I assume you did. And it is quite a surprise.”



“Well it does raise some questions about the vetting process. This is now the second time that we've had a similar incident; first with the nominee for secretary of the Treasury and now with Senator Daschle. I think the administration ought to take a look at its vetting process.”



###