E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
The White House on Tuesday responded to criticism of its welfare policies, denouncing as "crazy" a suggestion by Newt Gingrich that President Obama has increased the number of people on food stamps.
Press secretary Jay Carney dismissed of a question about a claim made by the former House speaker during Monday evening's presidential debate about Obama's record on food stamps.
"More people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than by any president in American history," Gingrich said at the South Carolina forum, using a line of rhetoric that's become a staple of his stump speech.
But the White House wouldn't let the claim go unanswered Tuesday. Carney explained that, due to the recession the country had been suffering when the president took office, there was an increase in “the number of people who…needed assistance.”
Carney went on to say: “I would simply say that those are the facts, and the economic policies that helped create that situation are ones that, in the case of the candidate you just mentioned, he supported. And they're the kinds of policies that he advocates to this day. This president takes a different approach.”
When pushed on the policies Gingrich advocated which contributed to the recession, Carney responded that the economic policies that lead to the economic crisis in 2008 were supported by almost all of the leading Republican candidates for president.
It wasn’t the only political moment of today’s White House briefing, either.
Carney also took aim at Mitt Romney’s reluctance to release his tax returns, pointing to a precedent started by the former Massachusetts governor's own father when it came to financial disclosure.
“President George W. Bush, President Clinton, nominees for each party for years and years and years. I think going back to 1976, this has been a very standard tradition…I think it was a tradition that was initiated by then-presidential candidate George Romney back in 1968, who released 12 years of tax records in '68, as I understand it.”
The press secretary demurred on calling on Romney directly to release his tax records.
Carney's hint of a smile upon finishing his answer may have prompted CBS’s Mark Knoller to respond, “You just happened to know that.”
Leave a Comment:
This is sooo hypocritical of Gingrich! The reason there are more people on food stamps is beacuse the economy has tanked. And why did the economy tank? Because of Bush's idiotic policies in the mortgage market. And where did those policies come from? Well, let's look at an article from Bloomberg...
His primary contact inside the organization was Mitchell Delk, Freddie Mac’s chief lobbyist, and he was paid a self- renewing, monthly retainer of $25,000 to $30,000 between May 1999 until 2002, according to three people familiar with aspects of the business agreement.
During that period, Gingrich consulted with Freddie Mac executives on a program to expand home ownership, an idea Delk said he pitched to President George W. Bush’s White House.
Note that The American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) was signed into law on December 16, 2003. It reduced the downpayment required for Fannie/Freddie guaranteed loans to 3%. It was pushed by Bush, sponsored by a Republican, co-sponsored only by Republicans and passed by Republican majorities in the House and Senate. This was the start of the housing crisis - making large numbers of low/no down-payment loans to people who couldn't afford them.
And it certainly looks like Newt Gingrich helped plan the whole program. Newt Gingrich did more to put people on food stamps than Obama did!
Good point, as lobbyist for Fannie MAe, he's as much the casue fo the problem as any of them.
So what were Bush's policies in the Mortgage market that caused a worldwide credit crisis?. References please and not just your opinion. None of you can tell me because none of you know.
Rick, the right wing is claiming Obama put all these people on food stamps and is destroying the econmomy? How accurate is that?
What goes around comes around.
Here's something you should read:
Conservative Opposition to Sensible Financial Standards
The mortgage crisis was created, in large part, by a rise in subprime lending. Subprime mortgages are high-interest loans, supposedly designed for high-risk borrowers. Only two percent of mortgages issued in 2000 were subprime compared to 28 percent in 2006 [The Washington Post]. By 2007, subprime loans accounted for only 14 percent of all outstanding mortgages but fully 64 percent of all mortgage foreclosures [Center for Responsible Lending].
The mortgage crisis was also fueled by an increase in "exotic" and "low doc" loans. Non-traditional or "exotic" mortgages are interest-only loans, no-down-payment loans, and adjustable rate loans (ARMs) with low teaser interest rates that "explode" after only two or three years (2/28 and 3/27 ARMs). From 1999 to 2006, the percent of subprime loans that were exotic 2/28 or 3/27 ARMs went from 53 percent to 93 percent [Center for Responsible Lending].
The mortgage crisis was also fueled by an increase in "exotic" and "low doc" loans. In addition, lenders expanded "no or low doc" loans, requiring limited documentation to verify a borrower's ability to repay the mortgage. In 2000, 23 percent of subprime loans were low doc loans, and by 2006, that skyrocketed to 43 percent [The Federal Reserve].
All on Bush's watch with Republican majorities in the House and Senate, all due to Bush and Republican policies.
All the laws enable this was enacted under Clinton. Lending laws were relaxed by the government to put more low-income and minorities into home ownership (Clinton goal). It wasn't done well and the private unrestrained private sector took advantage of government naievete. Most of the opposition to these financial reforms (Glass-Steagal, etc.) was conservative, but it was supported on both sides.
Basically, it was due to poor financial management by government. You can blame Bush all you want, I couldn't care less. However, the Obama administration has shown new, unprecedented levels of poor financial management and you didn't address that at all. Don't bother with the "more regulations" argument either. Regulations need to be smart and effective, more of anything doesn't work if they're garbage to begin with.
DP - sounds like sour grapes when the facts hit you. Fact is this: greed took over and Bush let that greed infiltrate what belonged to the American people, our 401k's our pensions and our jobs. On Bush's watch. And all you've got is insults against your President for paying the bills and creating jobs. Sour grapes and childishness on the part of the repubs, and all because this President is actually doing a good job, which is why repubs are ramping up their disgusting political games. The majority of people in this country will not be fooled with lies, talking points, and disrespect in 2012. Obama-Biden in 2012!
So you admit that the liberals are lying about what caused the credit crisis and resulting recession?
Mark Thomas-371822
#102.3 - Wed Jan 18, 2012 10:10 AM CST
Does anyone care about the wealthy on welfare . The capital gains tax is food stamps for the rich . When this giveaway is ended then we can talk about food assistance . Newt is a big beneficiary of this . If you're rich you pay 15 % tax rate on capital gains . If you're poor or middle class you pay 33% on interest from a bank account . Sounds like welfare to me .
Corporate welfare is okay by the Republicans - and Bush's bailout of Wall Street is okay with Republicans, as are the billions in bonuses given out after the bailout - but buying food with food stamps isn't. It would seem that the Republicans in this country are truly un American and totally unpatriotic in addition to being haters, and yes, let's admit it folks, racists.
So the abusers of the system such as you are accusing your fellow citizens of are not responsible for their own actions, but President Obama is somehow wrong for helping the poor.....hmmm. Warped
Dahly is quite something isn't he. The most uniformed, totally biased, liar I have seen.
Well, he matches up with the rest of his party. Dude, Bush lost this country 8 million jobs, outsourced 5 million, and brought this country from a record surplus to 11 trillion in debt. This President is paying Republicans bills. True to form the cowardly Republicans run in the other direction, screaming innocence, and blithely and stupidly think their actions have absolutely no consequences. Democrats have always cleaned up the messes made by Republicans, and obviously Dahly here drinks their koolaid and believes abject lies. Poor dude, poor poor dude. Fortunately, there are those of us who know and live the truth and will see this country, with President Obama, to a better day.
You post that someone is the most uninformed, totally biased, liar "I have seen" then show your ignorance by posting that there was a surplus in the treasury. There was a surplus in the budget that was reliazed because Clinton took the surplus from Social Security taxes and included it in his budget. The National Debt was at 5.28 trillion dollars on January 19,2001 the day before Bush took office. You can check this out for yourself by going to http://www.savingsbonds.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np and entering the debt range you are interested in. This is a government website
I suspect there will be a great many who will refuse to recognize the information provided. I'll will let those who can read this make the decision why some will ignore this information.
BTW, that post was directed at demsrock but he has been provided this information before and for some strange reason is still posting the same misinformation.
Hey Rick, and if Bush had done with the surplus what he should have, we would have a surplus in the trillions of dollars. But since repubs don't believe in surplus', just spending spending spending and not paying any of the bills, you can see why a surplus turned into trillions in deficit under Bush, when the reverse was put in place to grow the surplus and erase deficits. BTW Rick, Bush raided the Medicare and Social Security Trust fund. You had better check your facts with regard to Clinton. He raised taxes and he balanced the budget. Which is nowhere near what Bush did. Again, a surplus is a surplus, and the fact is that mechanisms were in place to pay down any deficit in the Treasury and to build trillions in surplus' and Bush blew the whole thing away.
Dummy - with a surplus of 236 billion a year it would have taken at about 15 years or so to eliminate the deficit that Bush inherited from Bill Clinton. And what about the credit crisis brought on by Clinton's manipulation of the housing crisis? That has added at least 2 trillion and probably a lot more considering it has put banks and financial institutions in both the US and Europe in serious jeopardy.
Read this Frontline (PBS) interview of Brooksley Born and why the banks and lending institutions got out of control to the tune of 680 trillion dollars. BTW, that is more than 10 times the GNP of all countries combined.
My whole Neighborhood is on Food Stamps,it is so nice to be on Obama watch!We have more benifits,than most that has a Job.Newt is trying to get me off my Welfare,so he can Jump in the Lake!!!
It just fascinates me that anyone who dares disagree with the opinions of the "enlightened" liberals or "progressives" as they now like to be called is automatically branded as a racist. I guess when you have no facts the easiest thing to do is emulate the Rev. Jackson or his wingman, Al Sharpton.