By Julie Percha

Feb 12, 2010 2:19pm

Today’s Qs for O’s WH

TAPPER:  Last month I asked you if the president had an opinion on some of the discussions in changing the Senate rules so that the Republicans — or the minority whomever in the future — wouldn't be able to demand cloture, 60 votes as often. You said you'd check with leg affairs. My understanding is that one of the president's close allies in the Senate, Dick Durbin, is throwing his support behind the bill from — Tom Harkin brought up that would introduce a sliding scale so the 60- vote thing wouldn't be required as often. Have you guys discussed it with Senator Durbin?  Do you have a (inaudible) on this?
  
GIBBS:  Let me check again on — on whether Senator Durbin — whether we've had conversations with Senator Durbin.  Look, I know there's been great frustration on either side of — either on this side or on Capitol Hill about the sheer amount of times in which cloture has needed to be invoked. The — we've certainly discussed the frustrations of, particularly as it relates to non-controversial legislation or non- controversial nominees.  We went through the — you heard the president discuss, you know, GSA director that had been stalled for nine months, had to seek cloture.  Cloture wasn't a close vote, and then she was approved 96 to nothing.  I think at that point you realize that this is the — this is a rule that is being — that is being abused.  I — I will check with — whether any conversations have been had with Senator Durbin about Senator Harkin's legislation.
  
TAPPER:  OK.  And then just to follow up on — on Ben's* question about the bipartisan jobs bill that Schumer, Hatch, Grassley and Baucus have been working on.  The reason that was given, it's my understanding, by — by Majority Leader Reid for scrapping that effort, much to the dismay of the senators who have been working on it, is that there were protests from some of the more liberal or progressive members of the Democratic caucus in the Senate.  Isn't this kind of bipartisan move that those four senators, bipartisan senators, had been working on exactly what the president has been talking about?  And isn't Harry Reid's move to scrap it, regardless of what comes out of the Senate eventually, isn't that contrary to what the president's been talking about?
  
GIBBS:  No, again — I — I — I think what — again…
  
TAPPER:  You guys put your support behind the bipartisan effort.
  
GIBBS:  And — and we certainly support working in a bipartisan way to get these things done.  Whether the vehicle goes — Jake, whether the vehicle is the four items that Senator Reid has now; whether that includes unemployment and COBRA extensions now; whether that includes extension for SBA lending; whether it includes tax extenders; whether it includes disaster relief — those are discussions that they'll have. Again, I — I believe that — I — I believe that many of these — many of these will be implemented and voted on and approved with strong bipartisan — bipartisan majorities.
  
TAPPER:  Right, but you guys obviously have lent your support to the bipartisan effort.  These four senators have been working hard on this bipartisan effort.  And then Senator Reid, because of apparent concerns from liberal Democrats, scrapped it.  That had to have been disappointing to the president and antithetical to his calls for bipartisanship.
  
GIBBS:  Well, what I was saying is — I — I don't — I do not think that — I do not think that taking — first of all, the — the main part of the piece of legislation that Senator Reid will have the Senate vote on is the Schumer-Hatch jobs tax credit. So I think there — what legislative vehicle many of these bipartisan ideas, whatever it moves on I think is — is in some ways not quite as important as demonstrating that we can work together. Putting as the centerpiece of a bill that's going to move when the Senate comes back from recess a bipartisan jobs tax credit I think sends the inappropriate message to small businesses around the country that Washington can work together to create an environment that incentivizes the additional hiring of workers at small businesses.  I think that's what the president has talked about.
  
TAPPER:  But to paraphrase the president, bipartisanship can't just be adopting one person's set of ideas.  I understand Hatch and Schumer were working on that tax credit together, but that was something that was the president's proposal, it was a Democratic idea ultimately.  I mean, the president…
  
GIBBS:  Well, I don't know that — well…
  
TAPPER:  The hiring tax credit?  I mean…
  
(CROSSTALK)
  
GIBBS:  … I think the hiring tax credit was — is a proposal that the president offered — I'm not sure you would consider Senator Hatch to be somehow overly sympathetic to the White House's view on these issues.  I think it demonstrates…
  
(CROSSTALK)
  
TAPPER:  … part of a larger package.  That's my point.
  
(CROSSTALK)
  
GIBBS:  … a messier — my messier way of saying, I think if you look at  both what's in this legislation, and I think if you look at what isn't in this legislation but will ultimately move, I can't imagine a scenario in which extending unemployment benefits for those that have been out of work and having those benefits expire isn't going to garner bipartisan support.  Extending health care…
  
(CROSSTALK)
  
TAPPER:  It just looks like a jobs version of when the president was asked about, the other day when he was here, and he was asked about Mitch McConnell talking about how they could support — Republicans could support nuclear energy or…
  
GIBBS:  But you're…
  
(CROSSTALK)
  
TAPPER:  … or clean coal technology…
  
GIBBS:  … what you're assuming…
  
TAPPER:  … and the president's response was — the president's response was, well, of course, they like — I mean, I'm paraphrasing — but of course they like that, those are Republican ideas that we're offering in the name of bipartisanship.  And so what's going on here is the reverse, Harry Reid…
  
GIBBS:  No, no, no, no…
  
TAPPER:  … taking out the one Democratic idea.
  
GIBBS:  Do you think helping small businesses grow by allowing them to  write off part of their expenditures is just something that's a Democratic idea?  Do think extending the Highway — the Highway Trust Fund extension is somehow a uniquely Democratic idea? I think if you were to break the four components of that bill out individually, each of those would garner strong bipartisan support. So I — look, I think we are in some ways over-reading some of this because, again, I think — personally believe that the four components of this bill, several components that were in the bipartisan bill but aren't in the Reid bill will still be bipartisan.  I think — I don't think any of the ideas that I've listed here today are uniquely De
mocratic ideas that have dispensed with Republican ideas in their stead.

*Ben Feller of the Associated Press

-jpt

User Comments

Sorry but the leadership in the Senate is really messed up. You continue to push thru legislation that doesn’t have full backing and then pull away from a bipartisan JOBS bill. What a mess. You know if people have jobs they can pay for healthcare. If people have jobs they could maybe handle some reasonable increases in energy but NO you put the cart before the horse and then wonder why people are so unsupportive. It is not communication it is substance and execution and I can’t believe Gibbs is even waffling in his answer on this.

Posted by: obieone40 | February 12, 2010, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm

Jake Tapper is the ONE journalist in the MSM that I feel is pretty down the middle. This is the type of reporting that really gets to the heart of the matter.

Posted by: Teri | February 12, 2010, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm

I can’t believe Gibbs is even waffling in his answer on this.

Have to agree with you on that. I think the NYT has it right in their editorial “How Not to Write a Jobs bill” as does Jonathan Chait in his article about the House GOP mocking the Dems. I can’t stand the GOP, but good lord, what a hot mess.
Paraprasing Chait, Obama is still more popular than Congress– the Dems and the Republicans. He throws something out there (incentives for small businesses to hire more workers, additional money to build roads and other construction projects, and rebates for homeowners who invest in energy-saving weatherizing improvements), and Pelosi goes her own way (“[C]onspicuously absent from the plan were President Barack Obama’s recently announced proposals to give Social Security recipients $250 payments, a tax credit for small businesses that create jobs and a program awarding tax credits to people who make their homes more energy efficient.” AP, 12/16/09)
Obama continues HIS pitch, and Pelosi expresses skepticism over an administration proposal to offer tax breaks to businesses that create new jobs.
Senate Democrats and Republicans come up with a bipartisan bill, quickly praised by the White House (though it wasn’t a perfect bill–) and then Harry Reid says no.
Frustrating.
As the NYT piece concludes, “A full response to joblessness is already overdue.”

Posted by: progressive mama | February 12, 2010, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm

Jake may be the only one in the news racket coming close to earning an honest buck .

Posted by: nat turner | February 12, 2010, 2:52 pm 2:52 pm

How soon will Clinton resign and announce her intention to run for president.. maybe after the 2010 midterms

Posted by: What? | February 12, 2010, 3:10 pm 3:10 pm

“How soon will Clinton resign and announce her intention to run for president.. maybe after the 2010 midterms”
ROFLMAO!

Posted by: RyanC | February 12, 2010, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm

Suddenly.. Hillary Clinton seems like a political goddess..

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | February 12, 2010, 3:22 pm 3:22 pm

Jake Tapper is underpaid.. putting up with this.. I hope it’s a front end investment as a media higher up one day.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | February 12, 2010, 3:34 pm 3:34 pm

You gotta wonder what the WH transcript of Gibbs’ appearances look like. But not enough to go to the WH website.
Posted by: Susie | Feb 12, 2010 2:56:15 PM
Susie, believe me, it’s worth the trip to the WH website. If you think Gibbs is an idiot just from Jake’s questions, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. Really, go to the website…I promise I’ll be laughing right along with you!!

Posted by: Shoe | February 12, 2010, 4:09 pm 4:09 pm

u r right.. that’s why Howard Dean was thrown under the bus…

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | February 12, 2010, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm

A “jobs” bill that will do little-to-nothing to create jobs (even the AP is reporting as such).
Sounds about right for this smoke-and-mirrors administration.

Posted by: tjp612 | February 12, 2010, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm

The Republicans are bent on the complete and utter destruction of America all just so they can seize power and control, that is how blatantly arrogant and self serving they seriously are. They would rather destroy America than work with the Democrats to put Americans back to work.

Posted by: Just the Facts | February 13, 2010, 4:04 am 4:04 am

The Republicans are bent on the complete and utter destruction of America all just so they can seize power and control, that is how blatantly arrogant and self serving they seriously are. They would rather destroy America than work with the Democrats to put Americans back to work.
by “Just the Facts” ____________________________________
Then please explain why Sen Maj leader Reid (a dem) pulled a BIPARTISAN (dems & reps actually working together) JOBS bill before it could even come to a vote. I don’t think either side is perfect but what your saying really doesn’t follow what has actually happened in this case.

Posted by: GO | February 13, 2010, 7:43 am 7:43 am

The tax cuts that were included in the bipartisan bill were passed by the House in their jobs bill.
When it is put into a bipartisan Senate bill the progressive left Democrats slam them as not related to jobs. Then why are they ok in the House jobs bill?
“About $33 billion in popular tax breaks, including an income tax deduction for sales and property taxes and a business tax credit for research and development, would be extended through 2010.
The tax breaks, more than 40 in all, expired at the end of 2009.
The House voted to extend them in its more extensive jobs bill in December, but the Senate never addressed them because of the health care debate.”

Posted by: win | February 13, 2010, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm

this seems to be another instance of proposing tax credits when the focus should be on improving the small business credit flow. credit remains tight and should be looked at again.

Posted by: ryan | February 15, 2010, 9:46 am 9:46 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.