Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Obama Debunks the Myth that He had a Supermajority in Congress for Two Years
By: Jason EasleyOct. 24th, 2012more from Jason Easley
In a candid interview with The Des Moines Register, President Obama debunked one of Mitt Romney’s favorite talking points that Obama had a supermajority in Congress for two years.
Mitt Romney is fond of saying on the campaign trail, “Remember that he had a supermajority in both the House and the Senate in his own party for his first two years.”
Romney’s statement is absolutely false, and Obama throughly debunked it in an interview with The Des Moines Register.
Here is the transcript from The Des Moines Register,
Q: Yes, that begs a question from us, Mr. President. Some say you had a super majority in your first two years and had this incredible opportunity, but because of what you were talking about, as you were running, you had to go to get Obamacare done. Do you have any regrets taking on some of the economic issues, some of the issues that we’re talking about for your second term, that when you had the chance, so to speak, during your first — do you have any regrets that you didn’t do that at that time?
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely not, Laura. Remember the context. First of all, Mitch McConnell has imposed an ironclad filibuster from the first day I was in office. And that’s not speculation. I mean, this is — it’s amply recorded. He gave a speech saying, my task is to defeat the President.
So we were able to pass emergency action with the stimulus, but we had to get two votes from Republicans. One of them essentially was driven out of the party — Arlen Specter, who recently passed away. We then — because Al Franken hadn’t been seated, didn’t have 60 votes until essentially — there was a four- or five-month span. But at that point, we had already put in place the Recovery Act. We had already moved forward to help states avoid teacher layoffs and so forth.
And we were already in the process of stabilizing the banks. We had already engineered the process that would save the auto industry. And there was not going to be any appetite among Democrats or Republicans to take additional actions until we saw the progress that was making — that needed to be made.
And our health care system is one-sixth of our economy. And if we have a situation where spending on health care at every level is going up at 6, 7, 10 percent a year, and we’ve got millions of people without coverage or inadequate coverage, the suggestion that that’s not a central economic priority for the country is just something that I wouldn’t buy.
And the suggestion somehow that if we hadn’t pursued Obamacare, somehow we would have gotten additional stimulus out of the Republicans, for example, that we could have primed the pump more, that’s just not borne out by any of the evidence.
In fact, the first stimulus, when we were contracting at 8 percent a quarter, as I was on my way up — a month after I’d been elected, or two months after I’d been elected — as I was on my way up to meet the House Republicans to share with them my ideas about how we should pass this Recovery Act, they already said they’d vote against it.
Now, it was a political strategy that won them back the House, but it wasn’t good for the country. And I think the country recognizes that. So what I want to do — now we’re in a different position, and I genuinely believe that one of the best things we can do for the economy is to settle this issue of government spending, entitlements, and revenues so that we can provide the kind of certainty that I think businesses and individuals are looking for.
Because Republicans contested the election of Al Franken, when Obama was sworn into office there were 58 Democrats. A supermajority is composed of 2/3 the Senate, and since 60 voters are required to overcome the filibuster rules, Obama didn’t even have the basic majority that he needed in order to pass legislation when he took office.
This timeline from The War Room with Jennifer Granholm illustrates why Obama only had 60 Democratic votes for a brief period during his first year in office:
When Republicans, like Mitt Romney, say that Obama had a supermajority in Congress for two years, they are lying. It was nice to see President Obama confront this insidious falsehood that is designed to achieve nothing other than make him appear ineffective head on.
The idea that Obama had a two year supermajority is a lie wrapped around a Republican delusion.
Just like there are no numbers in Mitt Romney’s tax plan, and there is not a Republican jobs bill that isn’t a tax cut in disguise, Barack Obama never had a two year supermajority in Congress.
Obama never had a two year supermajority.
The President never had a one year supermajority.
There was never a supermajority for Obama.
By a 51-48 vote the Senate passed President Obama's plan cut taxes for the middle class and end the Bush ...
When the Majority Doesn't Count Republicans have managed to give the public Republican rule even thou ...
It's understandable that Romney would be bummed when the economy is seen to be improving, but when did w ...
President Obama used the news that the unemployment rate has dropped to 8.3% to warn John Boehner and th ...
A new CNN poll explains why President Obama is leading in the polls. By margin of 57%-35%, registered vo ...
PAULADENMON
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 12:00 pm
President Obama is criticized for spending too little time, money and energy publicizing his proposals for the next 4 years. This article shows one of the main reasons why he has not been able to do that. He has to spend so much TIME, MONEY, AND ENERGY correcting the lies of the Romney campaign, this being a perfect example. Democrats and others that were watching and praying for action on jobs programs and health care remember the tense months after the inauguration when the votes just were not there. The Republicans blocked every bill from the outset.. And still the Republicans use lies to make points.
Jim H.
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 12:08 pm
I’m happy to see the president himself say what many of us have been saying to counter the popular right-wing talking point of the past 2-3 years. There are even some Republican ideologues who cannot differentiate between a simple majority and a supermajority nor do they seem able to recognize the historical level of obstructionism, recorded as filibusters and cloture votes.
cokes
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 12:22 pm
and let’s not forget the blue dog democrats!
Reynardine
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 12:35 pm
Oh, Hell, I wish I could…not to mention the infinitely self-important and treacherous Lieberman.
Sammy
Oct. 25th, 2012 at 1:35 am
Speaking of Lieberman, where is he?
kimbutgar
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 12:43 pm
Was this a fake out when he said he wanted the interview off the record so that the MSM would report it?
CARRIE BAGGETT
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 1:06 pm
thank you for letting the truth be told,i don’t believe anything romney or the repoke say,the country has always done better when democrats was in office,i have voted dem.from the time i was allowed to vote after johnson signed the bill,being of color i have seen people killed beaten in order for me to vote.obama/biden
Rich H
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 2:06 pm
Great! I’m glad he finally articulated this urgent issue. But why did he go through three debates allowing this lie to perpetuate? It’s extremely important & the MSM have ignored calling it out for the most part.
J
Oct. 24th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
To be fair; there was a short window of ~5 months total where there were 60 votes available for a filibuster proof Senate… however, two of those votes were independents that “usually” caucused with Democrats. But to claim he had two years is insane. It was never that long. Also keep in mind that the Senate was in recess for a long portion of that time.
www.outsidethebeltway.com...
The Platzner Post
Oct. 25th, 2012 at 1:35 am
Another one of Mitt’s Myths gets debunked!!! “Obama never had a two year supermajority. The President never had a one year supermajority. There was never a supermajority for Obama.”
Sharing on The Platzner Post Facebook, and Twitter
www.facebook.com/ThePlatz...
Maj
Oct. 25th, 2012 at 6:21 am
Let’s not forget the sickness of Kennedy and Byrd, and subsequent deaths when it comes to this supermajority myth.
Breezy
Oct. 25th, 2012 at 10:28 am
Bill Maher articulated this point clearly-When they say, “The president had complete control of Congress for two years, and did everything he wanted.” it’s just factually wrong. Democrats had a “filibuster proof” majority in the senate for a very short period. It took Al Franken seven months to get seated because of the recount dispute, and by the time he was, Ted Kennedy was dying. So Democrats really only had 60 senators from September 24, 2009, when Kennedy’s replacement was named, until February 4th, 2010, when Republican Scott Brown won the special election there. The senate was in session for just 72 days over that period, so that’s how long Obama had a real Democratic Congress — 72 days, not two years.”