According to President Obama, cutting government spending will “certainly slow our recovery.” Over and over again, he has described the sequester’s threatened $85 billion cut in spending out of a $3.8 trillion budget as “devastating.” But that represents a mere 2 percent cut in spending. Obama frightens people by pretending that the $1 trillion cut takes place right away rather than being spread out over 10 years.
Sounds like more of the same. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama continually promised to “cut net spending” and make government smaller. The stimulus was promised not to “raise projected deficits beyond a short horizon of a year or at most two.” Yet, now during the fifth year of Obama’s presidency, we are told that we can’t cut spending, that we need even more government “investments.” . . .
The economy will remain Topic A, and Obama’s speech is expected to warn of the danger automatic spending cuts known as the sequester pose to a slowly improving economy. At the same time, Obama will give due weight to other priorities such as immigration and gun control. . . .
A sharp decline in defense spending led the U.S. economy to contract at the end of 2012 by 0.1 percent, but it did little to change the fight over further cuts to the Pentagon set to begin in March.
The White House used the report to lash out at Republicans, arguing the GOP should agree to a deficit-reduction package that includes spending cuts and tax hikes to replace the $85 billion in scheduled cuts known as sequestration.
“Our economy is facing a major headwinds, and that's Republicans in Congress,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said. “It can't be 'we'll let sequester kick in because we insist tax loopholes remain in place for corporate jet-owners.' ”
Republicans counter that they agreed to raise tax rates on households with annual income above $450,000 in a deal earlier this month and that they will not raise taxes again. Instead, they say President Obama must accept spending cuts. . . . .
President Obama is entering his second term with many of the nation’s voters still pessimistic or unsure about their economic prospects, a new poll for The Hill has found. . . .
Sixty percent say they do not expect to make major economic strides during Obama’s second term, compared to just 38 percent who expect to be better off in 2016.
Despite the lingering pessimism about the trajectory of the nation’s economy, the poll does offer a silver lining for the president as he prepares to take the oath of office again — by a 2-to-1 margin, voters blame Congress, instead of him, for the nation’s woes.
Fifty percent of those polled blamed Congress the most, compared to just 25 percent placing blame squarely at the feet of Obama. Another 10 percent apiece blamed voters and the media the most. . . .
Delaware taxpayers appear to be getting soaked twice under a deal in which the Democratic governor loaned $21.5 million to a hybrid electric carmaker to set up shop in the state. The company has yet to produce a car in Delaware, and taxpayers are footing the electric bill for the idle plant.
The deal was enthusiastically announced in 2009 by Gov. Jack Markell and Vice President Biden -- formerly Delaware's senior senator -- as a way to bring as many as 2,500 green jobs to the state. But California-based Fisker Automotive Inc. has since suffered a series of setbacks that have compounded its shaky financial situation.
"It has not worked out the way he had envisioned," Markell spokeswoman Cathy Rossi acknowledged Monday in a statement to FoxNews.com. "We didn't know and couldn't have known about the underlying technical and financial problems."
Delaware reportedly has paid at least $400,000 in utility bills since about April, when Fisker halted operations and laid off dozens of workers at the 142-acre, Wilmington-area facility. Markell staffers told The News Journal the payments are part of the grant deal and necessary to at least keep Fisker's small-scale operation on life support. . . . .
However, in February the U.S. Energy Department stopped disbursements on Fisker's $529 million loan because the company purportedly failed to meet production and sales goals on its electric plug-in sedan, the Karma. . . .
