March 11th, 2009
03:21 PM ET
14 years ago

President signs spending bill

WASHINGTON (CNN) - President Barack Obama on Wednesday signed the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, despite complaints that it is loaded with earmarks.

Filed under: President Obama
soundoff (74 Responses)
  1. Dylan from Minneapolis

    People like to generalize and put everything into nice little caregories. President Obama said during his campaign that instead of chopping earmarks with an ax, like McCain said he would, he would use a scalpel and cut things that didn't work and keep things that did. If these "earmarks" are going to create jobs, I would consider that a good investment.

    ***Please post CNN***

    March 11, 2009 03:57 pm at 3:57 pm |
  2. phoenix86

    Carlo: You wrote:

    We haven't had a budget since October. Bush should have handled this before he left office, instead of spending an extra year being a lamer duck than he normally is. Now, President Obama is stuck with a bill that is almost 6 months overdue, and not signing it would have shut down the country.

    I can't believe that people are bashing him for signing a bill that was supposed to be taken care of last October. For some folks, he'll never do anything right.

    You just forget three points:

    1. The democrats controlled congress last year.
    2. Bush threatened to veto this bill.
    3. Because of point 2, the dems waiting for the wimp to get to the White House.

    March 11, 2009 03:57 pm at 3:57 pm |
  3. Dan, TX

    Why do so many people, who know so little, want to leave comments here so often? Blow off steam, I guess. That's the only reason for most comments here, because many of them lack common sense.

    March 11, 2009 03:58 pm at 3:58 pm |
  4. dan

    Just read he signed the bill away from the cameras. LOL coverage is good when it allows him to look good but when he signs a bill that is loaded with the very earmarks he claims he wants to eliminate he sneaks off away from cameras to do his dirty work. Do as I say not as I do. If he truly is against earmarks he should have vetoed it and told congress to give him a bill without the earmarks. Remember, Dems control both houses and the WH, shouldnt be that hard if it truly is what he stands for and if he truly is the leader of the Democratic Party. Looks to me he wants to sound tough on earmarks and then make sure he pays back all the Democratic Party contribitors that have been waited for years to get their payback for the support they have provided. Business as usual in Washingtion. Happily I didn't believe Obama's line of nonsense about changing how Washington works so I'm not suprised or disappointed by this. Same ol' same ol'. Change makes for a good sound bite but reality is the Dems have waited 8 years to be in this position and they will milk it for all its worth. That is how its done in Washington. The only people suprised by this are the ones silly enough to believe campaign rhetoric. Someday you people will see the light. LOL

    March 11, 2009 03:58 pm at 3:58 pm |
  5. Tony - Fla

    See, we got CHANGE. We got he can CHANGE his mind about what he said to you all before you were stupid enough to elect him. -“Change We Can Believe In”. Barack Obama Nov 3, 2007

    March 11, 2009 03:59 pm at 3:59 pm |
  6. Dennis

    We've been PORKED!!!

    March 11, 2009 04:00 pm at 4:00 pm |
  7. ken

    How can he tell us he's against earmarks with a straight face and sign this bill?

    March 11, 2009 04:01 pm at 4:01 pm |
  8. cph9680

    Ah here's to the change we can't even see because well Obama's just another lying politician.

    Spend, spend, spend!

    March 11, 2009 04:01 pm at 4:01 pm |
  9. Ray Fisher

    All the President needs is a treasury secretary with communications skills and a plan!!! He is so generic he needs a black & white label on his forehead!!! The word is details and until we have details on banking changes, the economy will remain idle!!!

    March 11, 2009 04:01 pm at 4:01 pm |
  10. jj

    Bring this pork home we need it!

    March 11, 2009 04:48 pm at 4:48 pm |
  11. Griff............... on The Truth...

    Your: "so called president lied, and lied and lied again to get Elected. Now hge wants every to bend to his Wim. Not going to happen..
    He is a Bloody Liar... Period....

    March 11, 2009 04:52 pm at 4:52 pm |
  12. Ben

    Does anybody remember the word scalpel during the campaign?
    Looks like the media can not help it but try drive the republicans talking points home!

    March 11, 2009 04:55 pm at 4:55 pm |
  13. Don

    I voted for Obama and will not do so again. He has lied enough.

    March 11, 2009 05:06 pm at 5:06 pm |
  14. In Houston, TX

    I am convinced that if Obama didn't sign this bill, people would still complain about something...anything. If they couldn't find their dis satisfaction there, they would look to something else the administation is doing to complain and point out. It's okay, I understand. Everything is going to be alright

    March 11, 2009 05:07 pm at 5:07 pm |
  15. Len in Washington

    OK......I've been watching the Senate Debates, the various nightly news programs, the weekend talking heads and their interviews and I've seen a lot of Republicans whining and complaining about "the horrible budget filled with earmarks."

    What I HAVEN'T heard is one single Republican offering to withdraw just one of their earmarks.

    Don't forget....Republicans accounted for 40% of the nearly 9,000 earmarks and Republicans accounted for 6 of the top 10 "Highest Requesters."

    It's all crap!

    March 11, 2009 05:13 pm at 5:13 pm |
  16. yasmine

    Bush still left more crap to clean up... President Obama started his job deep deep in a whole..its easy to sit and blame but I know it is not easy to start that job in such a steep whole and people want it all corrected in 50days... get real people

    March 11, 2009 05:14 pm at 5:14 pm |
  17. B

    Yeah we remember the word SCALPEL during his still ongoing campaign but it looks like he picked up a chain saw by mistake?
    I'd say he's out to masacure America.

    March 11, 2009 05:15 pm at 5:15 pm |
  18. MorningStar

    No a good move, I think

    March 11, 2009 05:15 pm at 5:15 pm |
  19. annie - Palin 2012

    Just another broken campaign promise. Just a typical lying corrupt chicago politician.

    March 11, 2009 07:52 pm at 7:52 pm |
  20. Al

    I thought in the campaign that the President said that he was going to go through these things line by line and eliminate what was not needed. Where is this money going? I'm certainly not seeing any of it.
    Nobody I know is seeing any of it. Who is benefiting? Shouldn't they have a site where they can publish these things for the general public to read before they are voted on so maybe the general public can vote on them and have their say? Wouldn't that be true transparency? We have absolutely no idea what is in it and what isn't.

    March 11, 2009 07:52 pm at 7:52 pm |
  21. floridian


    Three thoughts about earmarks...the first is that former Pres. Bush told the previous Congress that he would veto the appropriations bill as they had drafted it, to include many more earmarks than the current one has. The Democratic leaders of Congress shelved the appropriations bill with the hope that then-Sen. Obama would win the election and would be more open to signing such a pork roast. Voila!

    Second: the rules for earmarks should require that no member of Congress, or his family up to and including second cousins, receive any direct benefits of the earmarks he/she has written into the bill. By direct, I would include campaign donations, post-Congressional jobs, spousal jobs, money to family members' companies, etc.

    Third: All earmarks need to be included in each bill before it is reviewed by the sub-committees and then the whole House and/or Senate and made public before the President's signature.

    March 11, 2009 07:57 pm at 7:57 pm |
  22. Phil

    Hope his daughters don't get too comfy at their schools cause BO is one and done!

    March 11, 2009 07:57 pm at 7:57 pm |
  23. Maria

    What is unbelievable about this bill is that some of our politicians signed a bill that they didn't even read. If they don't have the common sense to read before signing then why are they even in office? Congress had a lower rating than Bush did and they deserved it, I doubt this is going to raise their rating. I was appalled that some of our esteemed leaders owe quite a bit of taxes, have criminal records, own off shore accounts so they don't have to pay taxes, don't report extra funds that they have gotten, have ties that are extremely questionable, have DUI's etc. and we are suppose to trust them. I don't want to hear that they are human and make mistakes, when blue collar Joe makes a mistake he pays for it, he is not rewarded. Both sides are at fault here. Obama did pledge to change how things are done in Washington but his cabinet picks have shown that not only is he not changing anything but some of them owe more taxes than most Americans. You can sit there and complain that Gore won the popular vote well so did McCain. You can blame Bush for everything, but at least your able to do that, because believe it or not he did keep us safe. Our economy was in the tank when Reagan took over and thanks to his tax cuts our economy jumped back in record time. After 9/11 our economy tanked again and the Bush tax cuts brought it right back. Those making over 250,000.00 are already paying high taxes to take away their house finance charges so they can't claim them on their income taxes isn't going to jump the economy in fact many of these people are already making plans to cut back on their business and charities, they are going to lay off workers, take away benefits etc. The top 10% already pay 65% of the taxes in this country and 40% don't pay anything at all. Why not go after all the big shots in congress, make them pay their fair share. They just voted to keep their 4,500 pay raise starting next January. I do believe that Obama thinks he is doing the right thing but he is young and inexperienced and unfortunately he has to learn the hard way and all we can hope for is that it doesn't destroy us in the pro

    March 11, 2009 08:02 pm at 8:02 pm |
  24. Keith in Austin

    I am for bipartisanship! I will be voting against the incumbant in the next two elections. Both parties are corrupt!

    March 11, 2009 08:13 pm at 8:13 pm |
1 2 3