Why doesn't President Obama just go on national tv Wednesday night

[William769]

without being in front of a joint session of Congress?

Does he not have the ability to do that? Did he not do that for the debt ceiling? Also would that not disrupt the Reugs debate? I honestly don't know, thats why I am asking.

[Empowerer]

1. I think a President unveiling a jobs plan that will be introduced to and must be passed by Congress

needs to be delivered to a joint session of Congress.

I'm not aware of any previous president ever unveiling a major piece of legislation in an Oval Office address. It just doesn't work.

He needs to give this speech in the well of the House to the entire federal legislature. So what if he does it on September 8th instead of September 7th?

Now if the Speaker had refused to invite him at all or if he insisted that the first available date was weeks away, that would have been different. But one day doesn't make a difference at all. And for the President to completely upend his goal of a joint session address in order to try to score an irrelevant political point would be a fiasco.

[William769]

3. Thanks for your response.

[doc03]

19. We all know his plan is DOA so why have a joint session

of Congress. The point of the speech is to make a political point anyway, Boner will announce it is DOA to the first camera he sees. The speach is being made for public consuption, we know the Congress will not act on anything he comes up with. The GOP has come out against the payroll tax cut so maybe they will back that and Obama can claim a vitory. Then SS takes another hit.

[Ian David]

2. He could do what Bush did the day John Kerry announced his candidacy for President.

He can preempt them for an "emergency announcement" about finding a terrorist's laptop computer a year ago.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. That's a bad idea, and here's why:

The whole point of the speech is to introduce a plan for job creation. Unfortunately Presidents can't make things like that just happen because they require legislation - and funding. Congress has to enact legislation and authorize funding for any kind of job-creation initiative. If Obama just sat in the Oval Office and gave the speech it would have far less impact than if he gave it before a joint session of Congress. And that's really the point of the whole thing: To tell Congress to get off their asses and do something (because the President can't do it; he can only propose it). He will be telling them to their faces that they have to do something, and the whole country will see him do it. A speech to a TV camera in the Oval Office is much too easy to ignore.

Also - it's much better to do the speech after the GOPer debate so they don't have the opportunity to comment on it or make it an issue during the debate.

[William769]

5. I would almost agree with that.

I guess I was thinking take it to the American people & say this is what Congress needs to do to help Americans get to work again. Now he's going to go up against the first NFL game on Thursday. :shrug:

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. The speech will be over before the game starts.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/01/obama-speech-may-not-conflict-with-saints-packers-kickoff/related/

[William769]

9. Thank you. I did not know that.

I only knew when the season started.

[Empowerer]

8. You want him to "take it to the American people" - but only if they don't have anything else

interesting happening that day . . . :-)

It's a football game - a game. If this issue is really so important to the American people - as important as many claim it is - maybe the American people can miss an opening kickoff to hear what he has to say.

There's ALWAYS going to be something going on. The Republican debate, a football game, the baseball playoffs, Dancing with the Stars . . .

[RC]

13. That ain't a gonna happen.

Pro/collage sports is the most important thing in the world to the sports nuts. The ICBM war heads coming down on the stadium can wait.

[Empowerer]

14. Well - if they are that uninterested in public affairs, I don't think the President should jump

through crazy hoops to get their attention.

Yes, he should try to schedule things when the most people will be paying attention. But if a football game is more important than a jobs agenda (and I wonder how many of the people who will watch the game rather than the speech are out of work) and working around them would mean the president has to delay his speech another week or two, then he should just go on with the speech and those folks can watch the rerun after the game.

Priorities . . .

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

15. See above. The speech takes place before, not during, the game.

No problem, except for the hardcore sports nuts who just have to watch all the pregame blather.

Oh, and the Republicans' response will have to be *during* the game. Ha.

[Ineeda]

6. Absolutely. And

"...He will be telling them to their faces that they have to do something, and the whole country will see him do it." And the whole country will see the rethug disrespectful, obstructionist assholery.

[elocs]

10. He needs to introduce his plan for job creation since it will be so well received

because Republicans are anxious for a million jobs to be created in order to help Obama's reelection.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. Looks like he has some plans to get the ball rolling even before the speech

and I'm thinking he's going to rub Congressional GOPERs' noses in this: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/obama-rolls-out-a-jobs-plan-that-doesnt-need-congress/244420/

"One week before he will make a major address to Congress on jobs, Obama is making sure they know he plans to move forward without them. The president has also directed the Education Department to come up with a "Plan B" updating the 2001 No Child Left Behind law in the absence of congressional action. The message to Congress is clear: Do your work or we'll do it for you.

Under Wednesday's order, the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, and Transportation will each select up to three high-priority infrastructure projects that can be completed within the control and jurisdiction of the federal government. The effort is labeled as a "common-sense approach" to spurring job growth "in the near term." In practical terms, that means speeding up the permitting and waiver processes for green-building or highway projects to get the government out of the way. One of businesses' foremost complaints with government infrastructure projects is that the paperwork is too cumbersome and creates unnecessary delays, according to White House economic advisers."

Since Federal agencies are part of the executive branch, he can empower the agencies to take on construction projects within their purview.

[elocs]

18. Then the question is: from where do Federal agencies get their money?

Republicans will do what Democrats would never think of doing when it came to Bush. The GOP will do whatever it can to stop or discredit Obama and they will never willingly do anything that would help him win reelection, like improving the economy and the jobless rate.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

20. These particular plans don't require extra money at this point.

They are aimed at streamlining the process of getting existing projects off the ground with an existing budget. Of course this is limited and short term, but it's a start.

[doc03]

21. Well they will cut entitlement programs n/t

[JohnnyLib2]

12. That would be loudly called "divisive."

It would be a major change in tone from the WH, but with big risks IMO.

[dennis4868]

16. he could but when you do it in front of a joint...

session in congress the issue gets ELEVATED! That's what Obama wants out of this.

[alc]

17. liberals will be on board with anything

He needs to win over moderates, independents, and even republicans if he wants to get something through the House. Many of them will be watching the debate. It doesn't matter if it's in front of Congress or not he needs the right set of people paying attention.

If he doesn't need the House it doesn't matter if/when he gives the speech. (some people say the admin can work unilaterally and doesn't need legislation to implement his changes).