Obama meets with head of CBO

[Anonymous]

This concerns me greatly. The CBO is supposed to be completely independent of the White House and doesn't report to the White House. Obama meeting with the head seems like an attempt to get him to change his projections. If Bush did something like this, it would be all over the media. Why isn't this being discussed???

Obama disclosed the meeting while being interviewed on the today show.

[jsteele]

Why would you be concerned when you have no idea what was discussed? If there is anything untoward wouldn't Obama avoid mentioning the meeting on TV? Also, what makes you think other presidents have not had similar meetings? Since Bush refused to release White House visitors logs, we might not know about such meetings, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

If Obama even sneezes the entire right wing goes crazy with a new conspiracy theory. This is getting pretty tiring. Come back when you uncover something real such as lying us into a war.

[Anonymous]

Sorry but if you are independent you should stay independent and that means you do your job and deliver the facts without any interference. Obama should read the results just like anyone else. Obama also has his own financial people that are free to disagree but his asking for the meeting begs the question that he trying to manipulate even if he is ultimately unsuccessfulThat's why the office is supposed to be independent of the White House.

When Cheny asked for a meeting with the CIA regarding some of their policies-there was an uproar from the media and the CIA reports to the WH. Why no uproar here when the CBO was created to be completely independent of the executive office.

[jsteele]

Comparing the Cheney meetings with the CIA to Obama's meeting illustrates the weakness of your argument:

1) Cheney's meeting were not reported contemporarily, but only later;
2) Cheney was not simply suspected of trying to pressure the CIA to report things to his liking, but shown to have actually done that.
3) The CIA is part of the Executive branch and Cheney could (and reportedly did) affect peoples' careers if they didn't do his bidding.

In this case, Obama had a meeting. That meeting has been openly reported. Obama has little to no influence over the head of the CBO because, as you have repeatedly pointed out, the CBO reports to Congress rather than the President. There is no indication that anything untoward happened at the meeting.

Since when is there something wrong with the President having a publicly-reported meeting? Does getting elected mean that he loses his right of freedom of association? And, since when do the President's opponents get to choose with whom he meets?

Obama has a press conference this evening. Wouldn't it make sense that he wants to understand the details of the CBO's reports given that he will surely be asked about them?

Clearly the right wing strategy is to cause Obama a death by a thousand cuts. Every little issue gets blown out of proportion and hyped like its the end of the world. A couple of weeks ago you were complaining about the firing of the Gerald Walpin. That was supposed to be the biggest thing since Watergate. Ultimately, both Senate Republicans and Democrats looked at the facts and realized there was no scandal. But, you had made your cut, so that was a success for you. This country is facing a huge crisis and all you want to do is tear down this president. You would rather see the country go down the drain than see Obama succeed.

[Anonymous]

Walpin was not dropped-he is now filing suit and there was no agreement among Republicans that his firing had merit. That has nothing to do with CBO. There is a problem with Obama calling a meeting because when you are an independent office you should not be having meetings explaining your findings. Obama should read and draw his own conclusions. The CBO doesn't report to him and it is not their duty or mandate to discuss findings with the President because you can feel pressure from the President to change your report. Cheney has every right to call a meeting because they were in the executive office and so he is privy to directly talk to them but you know alot of people had problems that including you apparently but somehow when it is something to do with Obama, you just blindly support it and go on the attack. You would have more credibility if you said you don't like meetings that can influence areas that should not have influence or even the appearance of influcence.

[Anonymous]

Ha! Such short memories. Re-read your history of Reagan and the CBO.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Such short memories. Re-read your history of Reagan and the CBO.

Reagan left office 20 years ago. I don't even remember who I was meeting with back then, let alone him.

[Anonymous]

Here's CBO's view of the meeting:

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/

"Meeting at the White House
July 21st, 2009 by Douglas Elmendorf
This morning President Obama said that he had met with the Congressional Budget Office regarding cost savings in health reform legislation. A number of people have asked me what happened, so here’s the story:

I was invited to the White House to meet with the President, his key budget and health advisers, and some outside experts. The President asked me and the outside experts for our views about achieving cost savings in health reform. I presented CBO’s assessment of the challenges of reducing federal health outlays and improving the long-term budget outlook while simultaneously expanding health insurance coverage–just as we had explained these challenges in a letter to Senator Conrad and Senator Gregg last month. I also described CBO’s view of the effects of the health legislation we have seen so far, as I did last Thursday in a hearing at the Senate Budget Committee and a mark-up at the House Ways and Means Committee. In addition, I discussed various policy options that could produce budgetary savings in the long run, drawing on CBO’s Budget Options for Health Care released in December, our letter to Senators Conrad and Gregg last month, and my comments last Thursday. Other participants in the meeting expressed their own views on these various topics.

People have asked whether it was exciting to meet the President and be in the Oval Office: Yes, and my kids will be jealous when they get back from summer camp and hear about it. Of course, the setting of the conversation and the nature of the participants do not affect CBO’s analysis of health reform legislation. We will continue to work with Members of Congress and their staffs, on both sides of the aisle, to provide cost estimates and other information as health reform legislation is considered."

Seems like they told the President about their views and will continue to do their job, uninfluenced by the President.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Such short memories. Re-read your history of Reagan and the CBO.

Reagan left office 20 years ago. I don't even remember who I was meeting with back then, let alone him.

Read David Stockman, Triumph of Politics

[Anonymous]

You are always going to be influenced if the president calls you in to "discuss" your findings. It's wrong and hopefully the CBO was strong enough to not let him bully him but you never know. He should have turned down the meeting and said it was inappropriate but of course the allure of Obama was too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are always going to be influenced if the president calls you in to "discuss" your findings. It's wrong and hopefully the CBO was strong enough to not let him bully him but you never know. He should have turned down the meeting and said it was inappropriate but of course the allure of Obama was too much.

Bullying is what the last administration did to the CIA to justify the war in Iraq. Unprecedented is Dick Cheney arguing that he is exempt from Presidential recordkeeping rules because he was (get this) as Vice President, not Constitutionally a part of the executive branch of government but a part of Congress. I mean, c'mon. If you are worried about this, how did you keep from jumping off bridges during the last eight years.