Yesterday afternoon I took part in a media and blogger conference call with Jared Bernstein, the chief economist for Vice President Joe Biden. The subject for the briefing and questions which followed was the “impacts of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan”.

Our previous coverage of Jared Bernstein’s opening remarks:

“…most American families get by on their pay checks, not their portfolios…”

The questions from new media in on the call:

Adam Siegel – getenergysmartnow.com: Uh, thank you very much for doing this call. Much appreciated. Uh, looking to [garbled] and focus on energy, global warming, as well as economic issues and the intersection of all of them, uh, when we’re looking at the limited news so far we see that the, uh, deal continues the slashing of a lot of the things that might be considered long term infrastructure such as aid for school construction [garbled] even while looking to try to get this bill passed are you already starting to lay the ground work for trying to recapture many of the good things from the House bill that don’t seem to have made it through the conference committee?

Jared Bernstein: Well, and I, I have to be mindful of the fact that I am, uh, uh, one of the team, uh, some of these folks are on their way back from the, the capitol now. Uh, so let me speak broadly in answer to your question. I can’t tell you we plan to go back to the well tomorrow to, uh, get back some of the things that were our original preferences. But, I, I can tell you that they, they were our original preferences and I can tell you that, you know, my understanding of some of the negotiations were that, that some of the opponents of pieces that were in this legislation were not saying we’re against, uh, school construction, we’re against, uh, uh, fiscal relief to states. uh, we’re, we’re, against, uh, expanding some of the health care. They were saying we’re against putting them in a, uh, stimulus or a recovery package, uh, that is intended to spend out quickly and, uh, um, well, fulfill the kinds of stimulative economic goals I talked about earlier. So, um, uh, my view, uh, is that, uh, no windows are closed when it comes to, uh, these good ideas…

…Matt Copper – Talking Points Memo: Uh yes, hi. Uh, I, I know you’re here primarily to talk about the recovery act but I’m just curious, uh, your sense of, of whether we are really gonna start to see a turnaround in the economy ’til we have a bailout, a bank bailout plan more firmly in place. In other words, how much can this, uh, this one piece of legislation do until we get some of these other components in?

Jared Bernstein: Uh, by the way, I used to write for Talking Points Memo.

Matt Copper: I, I know…[crosstalk]

Jared Bernstein: TPM cafe. Um, I think it’s a good question. And I’m happy to talk about it. I think it’s actually very much on point. Uh, I view the stimulus package and the financial stabilization package as, as extremely complimentary. Um, on its own the stimulus package will absolutely help in the ways I said and, and, and frankly, it’s not rocket science. I mean if you let a contract to fix a bridge, especially in a climate where those jobs aren’t being created otherwise, you’re gonna create some jobs. Uh, the, uh, but for the, for, for the, uh, package to have its full impact, including what economists call the multiplier effects, such that you, you begin to generate some economic activity over here and you get more economic activity over there, i.e. you build that bridge and one of the, uh, uh, uh, formerly un…, unemployed people  who’s now working on that bridge construction takes his, uh, or her pay check and goes to, uh, a retailer, a food store, whatever, uh, makes some new purchases that, remember, wouldn’t have occurred otherwise, that starts a chain of economic activity that, uh, uh, uh, helps to, um, get the economy back on track. That chain won’t be able to, uh, uh, function to full effect, uh, if, uh, credit lines remain frozen. So, the way I think that to, to wax, uh, medical on you for a second, is that, uh, the stimulus, uh, plan, the recovery act gets the heart beating again. The stabilization act, uh, uh, cleans out the, uh, the a, uh, carotid veins of the, uh, economy, uh, which has, uh, kind of been gouging on some, uh, pretty bad debt. Um, with the heart beating and the blood flowing, uh, the patient’s, uh, uh, uh, uh, back on track…

…Baratunde Thurston – jackandjillpolitics.com: Uh, good afternoon Mr. Bernstein, thanks so much for, uh, doing this call and, uh, everybody else for being here. I haven’t, you know transparency was marked, as a, as a big hallmark of how this act might be different from those that have come years, decades or even generations before. What can you say would be the, what are the metrics of success, uh, for, if this is actually working? You sort of mentioned two years down the line.

Jared Bernstein: Uh, huh. [crosstalk]

Baratunde Thurston: Jesse in his opening remarks said you will be judged by this. What are those judgments gonna be based on? What are your, what are the quantitative or qualitative goals you have?

Jared Bernstein: Sure, Um, first of all in terms of tran…well, uh, uh, part of the success, at least on the transparency front, will be the extent to which we track the progress of this legislation on, in, in, uh, on the, uh, the web site, uh, that we’ve, uh, announced we’re gonna form. I believe it’s recoveryact dot gov, although, uh, I doubt it’s…

Unidentified voice: It’s recovery dot gov.

Jared Bernstein: Recovery dot gov. So, so, you know, that’s obviously, uh, a level of transparency, uh, we haven’t seen, uh, in a really, uh, I don’t know, uh, uh, I can’t think of any other examples in the past. So, so, you know, I think we should be graded on the extent to which we do what we said we were gonna do in that regard. Um, uh, and I’m confident we will. Uh, this is a, this is something that comes from the very top. This is the President recognizing, uh, the need for, uh, that kind of accountability.

Uh, but the, the kind of quantitative metrics you suggested I also think are important. Um, the unemployment rate, uh, is expected in the absence of, uh, this, uh, uh, package to get up into something close to double digits, uh, um, by, uh, um, the, uh, probably, uh, late, uh, uh, later, uh, sometime a, I, I would guess, uh, around, um, late this year, uh, next year in the absence of, of our package. Um, I think, uh, the package should help to reduce the unemployment rate by about a couple of points. So, instead of being nine, nine and half, ten, ten and a half per cent, uh, the unemployment rate, uh, uh, um, may go, uh, oh a point, a point and a half higher than it is right now. It’s about seven and a half, so we could be looking at eight and a half, you know, maybe, maybe that neighborhood instead of, uh, maybe seven and a half by the end of, uh, two thousand and ten kind of back down to where we are now. Uh, if, uh, if the program is, is, successful. Now, uh, you have to be very careful when you give these quantitative metrics because, uh, they’re kind of, uh, uh, if things go as planned and obviously, uh, there’s lots that could happen between now and then. And no economist can, can, can know the future. That’s one of the reasons why our forecasts have large, um, guess, uh, confidence intervals, but large margins of error around them,

And so, uh, I think we should look for unemployment that, that is lower than it would be otherwise. Uh, um, we think we’re gon…to, as I said, create or save, uh, three, four million jobs. We’ll be tracking that closely. And, uh, I think probably more to the ground, uh, we should be looking for, uh, uh, uh, action that’s really identifiable whether we’re talking about, um, roads, and, and bridges, and repairs made in, in, you know, your, uh, look where you live. Um, uh, the
re’s gonna be, uh, in, in a state like California, obviously a large state, you’ve got, uh, uh, twelve, uh, million people. Twelve million workers who ought to be benefiting from the making work pay tax cut. Where are you from, by the way?  

Baratunde Thurston: I’m in New York state.

Jared Bernstein: Okay, so you know, you look at, you look at New York state. Uh, we expect about seven million people, uh, to benefit from the making work pay tax cut. That’s something we ought to be able to know about. Uh, we expect something like three hundred thousand families to benefit from the refundable college credit. Um, there’s a lot of unemployed people up in New York, about a million of them are gonna have, uh, uh, unemployment insurance benefits higher  by about a hundred dollars a month. You know those, those are the kinds of things that we ought to be able to quantify…

Approximately eleven minutes (one third) of the phone conference call remains to be transcribed. That will get posted when it gets posted.

This afternoon I took part in a media and blogger conference call with Jared Bernstein, the chief economist for Vice President Joe Biden. The subject for the briefing and questions which followed was the “impacts of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan”:

Jared Bernstein:…Thanks very much…I’m a, I’m really glad to be talking, uh, to this group. I talk to lots of different groups. And while I, I can’t see you, uh, I know you’re out there. And, uh, I’m glad of that. Um, folks may know, uh, some of my work. I was, uh, blogging for the Huffington Post before I, I came here.

Um, I’m just gonna quickly talk about, uh, where we are, uh, how I think we got here and how I believe, uh, this plan, ah, is, uh, critical to getting us back on track, uh, economically. Um, where we are is at best told from an economist’s perspective, and that is my curse, uh, by reflecting on some jobs numbers. Uh, last month, uh, we lost six hundred thousand jobs. Uh, that is the worst month for job losses in over three decades. And that got a lot of attention, because that kind of number just kinda, uh, screams out for precisely the kind of attention it got. The, the thing that maybe didn’t quite land as much in people’s thinking was the fact that the prior two months were revised such that they were almost just as bad. So over the past three months we’ve lost close to two million jobs. That’s a little bit less than a per cent of the, uh, of the, uh, employment out there in, in the country. And this is a, uh, a very serious, uh, uh, acceleration in the rate at which the job market is, is declining. Now, you know, when you’re talkin’ about it at that level it sounds, you know, fairly antiseptic. But the President, the Vice President have been traveling to venues where unemployment is, uh, uh, a lot higher than it was a year ago and, and in the case of Elkhart, Indiana and Fort Myer, Florida, basically in double digits. And these are folks who are facing, um, this tough economy on the ground. Uh, it’s, uh, as many of you know, and it’s one of the things that I think put our administration here in the first place, there are lots of middle class families that were having trouble even when the economy was expanding.Well now it’s contracting, and, uh, those folks don’t have a lot to fall back on. So this is, this is, this is very difficult times…

…And the urgency that those kinds of statistics, but more importantly, those kinds of people’s experiences, the urgency that that puts in, that that put into, uh, moving this legislation was something that was not lost on us here, uh, uh, at the White House. And thankfully I think not lost on many in Congress as well. And, uh, I’m very pleased to see, uh, the bill, uh, coming out of conference, passed by the House and the Senate, uh, and, uh, as I, as I already said, uh, it’s not over ’til it’s over. But, uh, we’re, uh, we now have a, uh, a deal struck on a stimulus, uh, package that’s, uh, about a huh…a seven hundred ninety billion pac…, we can talk a little bit about the, the composition of this if folks want. Um, look, uh, let me preempt one question there or just some thoughts there. Um, this is a political process with many, uh, moving parts and lots of different people with lots of different constituents. Um, there’s no bill that’s gonna come out of this process that every, every player is gonna say is perfect. But, and here I’ll, I’ll, I’ll wind down with this set of comments here, um, uh, because like I said I wanna tell you how I think this bill helps us get it out, get us out of where we are.

Um, you know Christina Romer who’s the, uh, chair of the, uh, Council of Economic Advisors here, uh, she and I wrote a paper a few weeks ago looking at, uh, uh, the job impacts that we would expect from a bill like this. And w.., we, we found that this, this package, uh, will create, uh, or, or save, uh, three to four million jobs over the course of the next couple of years. And that for us is the bottom line because, while there’s a whole bunch of talk right about, uh stock portfolios, uh, uh, most American families get by on their pay checks, not their portfolios. And so, uh, if they’re not, if they’re not working, uh, they’re, if they’re not drawing a pay check, if they can’t buy, if they are working but they can’t find the hours they need to make ends meet, uh, uh, they’re hurting.

Uh, and, uh this package, with its investments in infrastructure and roads and bridges and water systems, in schools, in, uh, the, uh, in, in, in making a down payment on, uh, the electric, uh, on, on the smart, uh, grid that, uh, is  critically important if we’re going to begin, begin to implement, uh, President Obama’s energy agenda. Uh, if we’re going to move, uh, uh, our IT over into health technology so we can, uh, uh, move towards electronic records, controlling costs and lowering error rates. Uh, if we’re going to make, uh, uh, investments in, in, in, in weatherization retrofits. Those investments are in here. Uh, they’re not, uh, the complete package by any stretch of the imagination, but remember, this is a, uh, a package that’s, uh, uh, supposed to spend out over a couple of years and then, uh, and, and then wind down, uh, by, uh, by late, uh, next year. Uh, we obviously need to continue and deepen those investments in the areas of energy and health care, particularly that’s one of the things this President ran on. Uh, but, uh, those down payments uh, are, are important. To save time, the package, uh, uh, has, uh, some different tax cuts. Uh, the making work pay tax cut which is, uh, um, one, another, uh, part of the President’s platform. Uh, that helps boost the pay checks of ninety five per cent of working families by five hundred to a thousand dollars.

Uh, that package, once we get this medicine into the system, that, these interventions will begin to, to create those three, uh, to four million jobs. They’ll help states that are facing budget constraints, they’ll help create economic activity, that’s uh, that’s missing, uh, in, in terms of, uh, of in…infrastructure, in terms of retail, in terms of, uh, uh, financial markets, in terms of really every sector of the economy. In fact, Christy and I found in our paper that ninety per cent of jobs we create will be in the, in the private sector.

So, uh, uh, I’m confidant that, uh, uh, the, uh, recovery act, um, is going to start turning this, uh, uh, the, this economic problem, uh, around. Uh, it’s not gonna happen tomorrow, it’s not gonna happen next month, uh, we, uh, uh, are going to face economic challenges, uh, even with this plan in the system. Uh, everyone know that or should. Uh, but it’s certainly gonna help a lot. I’ll stop there and, and, uh, take some questions…

The paper by Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein:

The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan [pdf]

Our previous coverage:

It’s the stimulus, stupid

Transcript(s) of the media questions and answers will follow in later posts as the Show Me Progress corporate headquarters transcription elves get to them.  

The irony. Senator Claire McCaskill’s most recent Twitter posts:

Just discovered today that one of my favorite DC spots, Busboys and Poets, has opened in my neighborhood.3 blocks away.Great food Reasonable

about 16 hours ago from web

Let me connect the dots. Since the grand Senate “compromise” with republicans has removed aid to states (which can’t run budget deficits) there will be severe cuts in higher education. We will then be definitely assured that highly qualified poets who have been laid off from creative writing programs in higher education will contribute to a highly competitive environment in the poet/busboy market, thereby enhancing the dining experience for those who can afford it. What’s not to like?

From Steve Benen at Washington Monthly:

…Ensign seemed encouraged by the fact that state budgets, including his own, would have to be slashed, calling the budgets “bloated.” He said, “What we should be doing is cutting back.”

Got that? As the recession worsens, and government spending is needed to prevent more Americans from losing their jobs, a leading Republican senator whose own state is about to get pummeled, believes it’s a good idea to “cut back….”

…Sen. John Ensign is entirely comfortable with all of these developments — those dreaded state budgets are “bloated,” after all — but doesn’t want anyone to acknowledge this publicly. Pointing to reality is “fearmongering.”

It’s not enough for congressional Republicans to stand in the way of sound economic policy during a crisis; they also want to discourage everyone from talking about it.

So, Senator McCaskill, are you as comfortable as Senator Ensign?

It gets better:

Higher education in Missouri is one of those “discretionary” parts of the budget. That means when the economy goes down, higher education is among the first to take the hit when the state cuts back. Tuition goes up because that’s the only other revenue stream available to public colleges. Students who have fewer resources drop out.

Two KC radio interviews within the hour.KMBZ and KCMO.Meetings with Mo college students, veterans, and hospital officials today. about 1 hour ago from web

I wonder what those Missouri college students are gonna say?

Running late, laundry and phone calls to both of my kids in college put me behind.Both struggling with their $. Budgets, not easy for anyone 41 minutes ago from web

Head smack. If your kids are struggling with their budgets in this economy what do you think is happening to the vast majority of families with kids in college? Yep, that state aid in the stimulus package continues to look “silly”.

I received the following e-mail with the link to the video:

…President Obama recorded a video to speak directly to you about his economic recovery plan.

America is facing an urgent and unprecedented challenge. The economic crisis requires bold and immediate action…

Are you listening Senator McCaskill?

On Thursday we participated in a media conference call with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Jason Furman. The first portions of our coverage:

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, part 1

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, part 2

Media asked questions on the subject of the economic stimulus bill:

…Operator: We go to the line of Jim Leach from Springfield, Illinois. Please state your media affiliation and your question.

Jim Leach: WMAY Radio in Springfield. Mr. Secretary, good to talk to you again. How are you?

Ray LaHood: Thank you Jim. Good to talk to you.

Jim Leach: Uh, two part question. If you could, one, elaborate on the situation with Illinois given our governmental turmoil here and also news of this massive budget defecit we’re dealing with. How prepared, is your sense, that we are to capitalize on some of these when we need matching funds and are we really in a position to do that? And also if you could address, are you doing any personal lobbying of your former, uh, colleagues on the hill, especially in the Republican caucus, to try to get their support for the stimulus package…?

…Ray LaHood: Well first of all Jim, I met with Governor Quinn. Uh, he was in Washington a couple of days ago. He and I had a very good meeting. Uh, I appreciate the approach that he’s taking. Uh, he knows that, uh, that our state can benefit. We have not funded, uh, very few if any road projects in the last two or three years. There are a number of projects that can be funded. Uh, as I think most of all of you know, uh, at the moment there is gon.. not gonna have to be any match on this. And so I know that the governor has talked about further down the road in terms of his infrastructure program. But there’ll be no shortage of projects that will be submitted, uh, from Illinois. Uh, and if they meet the criteria and meet the standards and, uh, are ready to go they will be considered along with, uh, all those from the other forty nine state. And uh, and so, we uh, you know, we feel that uh, you know, the governor and his people, have projects, uh, that will be ready to go and, uh, they’ll be considered, uh, like, like all the other states. I’m sorry Jim. What was your other question?

Jim Leach: …Doing any personal lobbying of Republicans on the hill, uh, given your, uh, affiliation with them and your contact with them in the past? Did you try to get their support for this?

Ray LaHood: …I’ve had senators call me, uh, with questions that they have because the, the bill is moving rather quickly, uh, through the senate. And I, what, whatever opportunity I have I try and test the temperatures of these senators. Uh, look it, uh, I, I’m a part of the, the Obama team here. I’m a part of a team of people that wants to see this passed and, uh, and so, I’m doing what I can, uh, to, uh, to be, uh, helpful in, in trying to make sure that it gets passed through the senate…

…Operator: …We go to the line of Alvin Reid from St. Louis, Missouri. Please state your affiliation and question.

Alvin Reid: Uh, St. Louis American. And Secretary, uh, LaHood, especially with the transportation and infrastructure projects, what kind of minority participation plan will be part of the recovery act, if any? Or, or how will that will be approached as, uh, these projects are decided?

Ray LaHood: Well, you know what? That’s a, that’s a point that I had not really considered and, uh, if possible, Amy, uh, if we can get back to him I’d rather do that than give an answer where I don’t really know thoroughly enough, uh, what the answer is. So, uh, and, and Amy, we can help get an answer back, so, uh, I’d rather leave it that way if I could.

Amy Brundage: Sure. Alvin, we’ll get right back to you after the call.

Operator: Our next question is from the line of Martin Ross from Bloomington, Illinois. Please state your affiliation and question.

Martin Ross: Uh, Illinois Farm Week. Uh, Mr. Secretary, uh, Illinois you know has a big emphasis on integrated inter modal transportation etcetera. To what extent will the team be looking at regional, particularly regional, but also larger interstate, uh, uh, national benefits, uh, economic benefits, uh, when triaging some of these projects? And then also, uh, Mr. Furman, if I could, uh, uh, flood control was mentioned. Are we talking about some upper Mississippi, uh, rehabilitation, uh, renovation efforts?

Ray LaHood: Well Martin the answer to your question is, is that these, these projects will be judged on are they ready to go, can people be put to work immediately, uh, do they meet all the criteria. Some of ’em will be regional in nature. Uh, and, you know, almost, in dealing with these I mean I think, uh, many of them will be regional in nature. Uh, probably not every one, but uh, we know that, uh, there’ll be multi-jurisdictional, uh, uh, they’ll be, uh, intrastate and interstate, and uh, and so, uh, I think you can count on us really taking a careful look at how quickly can people go to work, how quickly can the people spend the money, the, the states, and uh, and some of those obviously will be, uh, collaborative efforts…

…Operator:…We go to the line of Brandy Donaldson from Moline, Illinois. Please state your affiliation and question.

Brandy Donaldson: Hi, this is Brandy Donaldson. My affiliation is the Rock Island Argus Moline Dispatch newspaper. Um, Secretary LaHood, um, hello from the quad cities.

Ray LaHood: Hello.

Brandy Donaldson: And, uh, my question is: Once the money has been allocated to the states will there be any sort of mandates or checks put in place to make sure each state is spending the money in the way the plan calls for them to?

Ray LaHood: Absolutely. One of the things that the President has emphasized to all of us is the idea of transparency. People will be able to, uh, click into a web site to, to really look and pay attention. We will be, too. We’re gonna hold the governors’ feet to the fire on this. The money has to be spent, uh, effectively, efficiently in a way that reflects the idea that, uh, people are working and uh, there’ll be lots of access to, um, benchmarks on how the money is spent, when it is spent, how many people are working, and, uh, plenty, plenty of transparency on this. I guarantee you. And uh, this is one of the hallmarks of this administration, and uh, all of us that work on the Obama team have gotten the message on this. And we certainly have here at DOT because, uh, a good share of this money is gonna be spent out of, uh, our offices. And we want to make sure the taxpayers and the American people know that it’s being done in the right way, according to the way it should be, and, and that they have access to that information…

Operator:…Greg Hines (sp) from Chicago, Illinois. Again, please state your affiliation and question.

Greg Hines: Hi, Greg Hines with Greater Chicago Business. Mr. Secretary could you talk a little bit about the Amtrak money, particularly the two billion that’s in at least the senate version of the bill for high speed rail? Uh, what that might do for the Midwest as opposed to the Northeast corridor which traditionally has gotten the lion’s share of Amtrak money.

Ray LaHood: Well first let me say that this administration is, uh, is very committeed to Amtrak. I was just with the Vice President in Laurel, Maryland, uh just outside of the city of Washington, uh, earlier today at an Amtrak station, uh, that needs, that is in need of great repair. Not really the tracks, just the station, so that people can, uh, get up the steps, have a platform, uh that’s decent to stand on and to, and u
h, so uh. The idea that, uh, this money will be used for Amtrak is certainly a priority. And uh, something that, again, we’ll be looking very carefully at, uh, and not just in one particular part of the country. We’re gonna be working very closely, uh, to make sure that, uh, that the states that have really made the commitment to Amtrak, uh, certainly we know a number of states have, and more recently states have gotten more involved. But uh, we, we know that the Northeast corridor has made a huge commitment. States like Illinois have made a huge commitment. And uh, and so we’re gonna look carefully, and. And so the answer Greg really is that, uh, some of it will be spent on, uh, perhaps some infrastructure, but some of it will be spent on facilities like where the Vice President and I were at today so that people have a place to board and, and uh, and it’s uh, comports with, you know, the kind of service that people want. And, and so, uh, I, I think you can be assured that, that uh, the Amtrak money, uh, is a priority, not only just, uh, uh, in this, in this bill. But, uh, for the long haul there’s gonna be a pretty high priority. Congress passed an Amtrak bill, uh, last year. Every senator that I met with, before my confirmation, emphasized to me the importance of Amtrak and high speed rail. And it will be a priority of the, of President Obama’s administration and of the Department of Transportation, not only in the stimulus, but uh, but longer term…

…Operator:…That does conclude our conference for today…

Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill has been updating folks via Twitter:

Kinda fun to be here late.Everyone on the floor. A constant low murmer. Dozens of simultaneous conversations. How friends are made.

Oh noes! Please not Lindsey Graham! And it would be too much to hear about David Vitter on Twitter. What about the Udall twins?

The next entry:

I don’t think we will get out of here before midnight.Final vote on bill Monday.Still more amendment votes tonight.

From the incomparable Digby (We’re not worthy!):

…For some reason I keep thinking about the Senate voting 98-1 for the Patriot Act and all going to the steps of the capital to sing “God Bless America” together. Try to picture that happening under a Democratic president under any circumstances.

How true. How true.

Yesterday we participated in a media conference call with Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Jason Furman. The first part of our coverage:

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, part 1

Media asked questions on the subject of the economic stimulus bill:

…Operator: Our first question is from line of Sabrina Eaton from Washington, D.C. Please state your media affiliation.

Sabrina Eaton: Hi, I’m with the Cleveland Plain Dealer. Shall I ask the question [crosstalk]?

Operator: Go ahead Sabrina.

Sabrina Eaton: Okay. Um, I wanted to ask Secretary LaHood – there are just tons of estimates coming out from, you know, government groups, members of Congress, uh think tanks, about how much money every state is going to get and for what. And those of us who cover particular states are obviously very interested in this. Can you give us an idea of, you know, where these numbers are coming from and why a, a lot of them are so different? From one another…?

…Ray LaHood: Yeah, well, look it, I mean part of the idea here is what I stated I stated earlier, and that is that we want projects that are ready to go that have met all the environmental standards, there are not going to be any shortcuts. We’re not going to shortcut any of the, uh, guidelines and rules and regulations. And, uh, I think the answer is, uh, we’ll have a better answer when we meet with the fifty secretaries of transportation or highway administrators next Wednesday. ‘Cause we’ve asked them to bring to us some of the projects that they think can really be funded immediately upon passage of this bill. And I think we’ll have a better idea and I, I think, to be honest with you, I don’t know how much each state is gonna get because at this point we, we know there are a lot of projects that have been sitting on a shelf somewhere in all of these states. Uh, an illustration is Illinois. We have not been able to pass a capital budget so we’ve never had the, the match to fund a lot of projects. And so I met with the governor of Illinois, he was out here this week, and he tells me that they’re, they’re ready with a number of projects. But I don’t know what the money amounts are to be honest with you. I, I think we’ll have a better handle on that next Wednesday.

Jason Furman: And this is Jason Furman with one small thing to add, which is the White House release and I’m sure Amy or [garbled] or someone can get you. State by state fact sheets we did which have some of the different elements of the plan. Like how many people would benefit from the tax cuts, the unemployment insurance, how many jobs created, go to college, how many schools would be modernized, so the White House has provided some numbers as well.

Ray LaHood: I would say this, this is Ray LaHood again. I would say this. We have not had one state tell us that they don’t have some projects that can be funded. I mean, we know there’s a pent up demand out there…

…Operator: We go to the line of Gordon Trowbridge from Washington, D.C. Please state your affiliation and question please.

Gordon Trowbridge: Okay. Thanks, hi. I’m from the Detroit News. And this is, this is for probably more for Mr. Furman although Secretary, if, if you feel like jumping in please feel free. Um, the stimulus package, at least at this point, has some, uh aid that would indirectly, uh, uh impact the auto industry, although there’s nothing specific. And, and our guess is that you’re gonna have some que..some decisions coming up fairly quickly on the auto industry. Um, specifically in terms of the request from Chrysler for additional funding and uh, um and also some decisions in terms of an auto czar or a team to, to, to handle the recovery packages that those companies have had to submit. I wondered if you could tell us a little bit about how far along you are in, uh, making those kinds of decisions and, uh, how, how, how you prioritize those sorts of those things versus the stimulus package that, that you’re, that you’re talking about today.

Jason Furman: Yeah, and Gordon, let me give you a big picture answer. And Secretary LaHood if you want to jump in you, if you want to answer you can. Um, and then have somebody get back to you offline with more detailed answers to your questions. Um, the administration’s, you know, first and top priority is passing the American Recovery and Reinvestment. And the three to four million jobs that will be saved or created by this plan are in every sector of the economy, including a significant number in manufacturing. Then, moving on from here, there are several other critical parts of our short run economic strategy, including autos, foreclosure mitigation, and financial recovery in a way that Secretary Geithner will be outlining the details of. This act itself will help the auto industry, both in terms of stimululating aggregate demand and creating jobs. There are some provisions, for example in energy, there’s a very big effort to purchase fuel efficient vehicles for the federal fleet, research into batteries, tax cuts that will help the auto industry, so there’s a lot in here that help, um, the auto industry. And it will be part of a broader strategy that we’ll be following through on after the passage of this legislation.

Ray LaHood: This is Ray LaHood. I, I don’t really have anything to add to what Jason had to say on that…

…Operator: We go to the line of Sylvia Smith of Washington, D.C. Please state your affiliation and your question.

Sylvia Smith: I’m with the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, um, Indiana. And I’ve got two questions, on the, for Secretary LaHood. Um, mayors have been making the case here in Washington that money would be more quickly spent for transportation projects, in particular if it was funded through them, not through the states. I’m wondering what you think about that and also, uh, solely on transportation projects would you expect, um, the funding formula that’s used in the, the highway bills to be used in this way of allocation as well?

Ray LaHood: Well, first of all, uh, I saw that a number of mayors had met, uh, with President Obama. I saw that reported and uh, our feeling is that, that the fastest way to get this money out is through the state department of transporation. And these are agencies, uh, that are under the offices of the governors in the state. They have mecahnism, they, they have all the paper work, they know what the requirements are. Uh, a lot of these communities and a lot of these cities, unless they’re big urban areas, simply do not have the ability to do what we want to do and to do what the President wants to do. Get the money out the door, have people building roads and bridges and infrastructures, Spring, Summer and Fall. And, uh, I, I’ve heard the argument from the mayors and, and I know they’re concerned, but look it, if they, if they, if they work closely with the states and with the governors they’re, they’re gonna get some roads built in their communities. And uh, I, I just have no doubt of that. Uh, I think it’ll happaen and uh, it’ll happen very efficiently and effectively and in a way that reflects what the President wants here. Get people back to work.

Um, with respect to your other question our idea is, and that’s why we have this “tiger team” or this coordinating group that we’ve assembled in the department, so, as soon as the bill is passed, and as soon as we start receiving, uh, projects and programs that need to be funded we will have a team in place to make sure they meet all the requirements, uh, and that we can get the money out the door. I suspect that some will fit in to certain programs, but if they’re ready to go, and they meet the criteria, and they’ve met all the rules and regulations, uh, the funding will flow…

This afternoon we participated in a media conference call with Treasury Secretary Ray LaHood and Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Jason Furman arranged for Midwest reporters by the White House Media Affairs Office. The subject was the economic stimulus bill. Secretary LaHood spoke from his prepared remarks for about six minutes and then, with Jason Furman, took questions from media participants for almost another twenty minutes.

…Amy Brundage, Midwest Communications Director, White House: Hi everyone, this is Amy Brundage. I’m the Midwest Communications Director here at the White House. Thanks to everybody who took the time to join us today. And for those of you who I haven’t spoken with yet I look forward to getting to know you over the course of our time here. I am very, very pleased today to be joined by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood who is on the line with us and who will be speaking about an American, exeuse me, an economic recovery and reinvestment plan. And we also have Jason Furman who is our Deputy Director of the National Economic Council here at the White House, who is on as well. So with that I will turn the call over to Secretary LaHood and we will take some questions after the opening remarks…

…Transportattion Secretary Ray LaHood: Thank you Amy and thanks to all of you for joining us. I’m, I’m here at the Department of Transportation and I’m pleased to give you sort of a, as much information as we possibly can. It’s no secret that the economy is in the midst of an unprecedented crisis. And the President has called for unprecedented action. And the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan will immediately jump start [job] creation and foster long term economic growth. The plan will create over three to four million jobs over the next two years. Every economist and analyst that the President has spoken to has confirmed that the recovery plan will meet this goal. And the job goal is to create and arrange, create jobs in a range of industries from clean energy to health care with over ninety per cent in the private sector.

In addition to essential investments designed to create and save jobs in the near term, the plan addresses long neglected needs that are critical to laying the foundation for a robust and sustainable 21st century economy.

A key component of the plan is enacting the largest investment in America’s roads, bridges, transit lines since the creation of the interstate system. The goal is to help jump start the economy by getting money out the door for projects that are ready to go. Projects that have met the environmental standards, projects that have gone through all the necessary paperwork so that people can begin working this Spring, Summer and Fall.

At my direction we’ve already set up, within the Department of Transportation, a multi-mode economic recovery team that will make sure that the economic recovery monies for transportation are spent rapidly, legally, and wisely. The team, as we’re calling it – the “tiger” team – Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery, will also be developing common reporting standards and tracking the highway, road, bridge, transit, rail, aviation and intermodal investments directed by the economic recovery act. Also, I have asked all fifty state secretaries of transportation to come to Washington next Mon…, excuse me, next Wednesday, next Wednesday to tell them “this is what we want”. We want transparency, accountability, we’re going to do things by the book, and we’re looking for ready to go projects that can get started right away.

So you’ll be able to click on the web site – http://www.recovery.gov – and see where the dollars are spent, and which cities and towns the money is going to, and for which projects. And we’re going to do it without earmarks. The President has made that clear. This is a bill for project ready investments.

Under the plan over a hundred billion will be invested in roads, bridges, mass transit, flood control, and clean water projects and ninety five per cent of American workers will get a tax cut. The plan will get funds out quickly, and at least seventy five per cent of the package spending out in the first eighteen months after passage.

By including fast spending provisions like tax cuts for middle class Americans and families, measures to avoid state health care cuts, and temporary expansion of unemployment insurance, food stamps, and health care for the unemployed workers the package will spend out at least seventy five per cent of the total commitment within the first eighteen months after passage. The administration will work with Congress to refine the package to insure that it meets this seventy five per cent goal.

Critics have focused on a hand full of projects and programs that represent less than half of one per cent of the bill’s cost. While in almost every case these programs have merit and serve an important public purpose, the President has made clear that they do not meet the stimulus test they shou…, if they should not be included in the bill. And the President has made that clear in, in every instance that I know of.

This is an important time in our country’s history and an important time to invest wisely for the sake of our children and our children’s children. I’m proud to be at, a pivotal role in this and I also want to say just a couple illustrations providing, making work, paid, tax cut of up to a thousand to, for four million eight hundred ninety workers and their families in Illinois. The plan will make a down payment on the President’s “making work” tax cuts for ninety per cent of workers and their families – designed to pay out immediately in worker’s pay checks, creating or saving a hundred and fifteen thousand seven hundred jobs over the next two years in Michigan. Jobs created will be in a range of industries, again, from clean energy to health care with over ninety per cent in the private sector. And I guess I’ll leave it at that with those two examples. We have other examples and Amy I don’t know if we should take questions now or if there’s anything else you want to say.

Amy Brundage: Oh I think that’s great Secretary, thank you very much. With that we will open it up for a few questions…

The Show Me Progress corporate headquarters transcription elves will work diligently over the next few days to finish the transcript of the remainder of the conference call. We’ll post that material as it is completed.

The economic stimulus package:

H.R.1

Title: Making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes.

Sponsor: Rep Obey, David R. [WI-7] (introduced 1/26/2009)      Cosponsors (9)…

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 46

(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic; Independents underlined)

     H R 1      YEA-AND-NAY      28-Jan-2009      6:11 PM

     QUESTION:  On Passage

     BILL TITLE: Making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year ending 2009…

—- YEAS    244 —

Carnahan

Clay

Cleaver

Skelton

—- NAYS    188 —

Akin

Blunt

Emerson

Graves

Luetkemeyer

dday at Digby’s place:

Not One Republican Vote

…I don’t know how you can come away from this sideshow thinking anything but that Republicans are determined to have their Great Depression and that they openly wish failure upon the United States, or at least no economic recovery for anyone who needs it. Americans seem to have gotten that message too; it’s why Democrats have a 24-point generic ballot lead at this point for the next election…

[emphasis added]

Ike Skelton (D) voted “yes”. Think about that.

Not one republican vote. Not one. Post-partisanship is just a pile of useless bullshit.

There is no such thing as a republican moderate. All they have left are right wingnuts and party hacks.