ABC's Gibson falsely claimed “CBO says only 25 percent” of recovery bill “would get to people within a year”

Written by Greg Lewis

Published

During an unaired portion of his interview with President Obama, ABC's Charles Gibson falsely claimed that the Congressional Budget Office “says only 25 percent” of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act “would get to people within a year.” In fact, a CBO analysis of the Senate version of the recovery bill estimated that 26 percent of the bill would be spent before the end of September 2009 -- less than eight months from now -- and 78 percent would be spent by the end of fiscal year 2010.

During an unaired portion of his February 3 interview with President Obama, ABC World News host Charles Gibson falsely claimed of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, “CBO [the Congressional Budget Office] says only 25 percent of this bill would get to people within a year.” In fact, in its analysis of the version of the bill introduced in the Senate, the CBO -- which releases its calculations based on the federal government's accounting period, in which a “fiscal year” begins on October 1 -- estimated that, including both increased spending and decreased revenue from tax relief, 26 percent of the bill would be spent before the end of September 2009, less than eight months from now, and 78 percent would be spent by the end of fiscal year 2010.

From Gibson's February 3 interview with Obama as transcribed on ABCNews.com:

GIBSON: CBO says only 25 percent of this bill would get to people within a year. Republicans now say it needs to be more stimulative, there needs to be more money on infrastructure, there needs to be more tax cuts, there needs to be more help for homeowners, maybe even guaranteeing 4, 4.5 percent mortgages.

Would you accept those things?

OBAMA: Well, keep in mind, for example, some want to put more infrastructure in the bill, and they're also complaining that it doesn't spin out fast enough. In some cases, there are contradictions there. I mean, we may want to spend on a whole bunch of great infrastructure, but it may take seven or eight years to do it, in which case we're vulnerable for the criticism that it's not spinning out fast enough. I think that in a package of this sort, that has to go to Congress with 535 opinions, at least, then there's going to be some give and take.

What I've said is that any good idea thrown out there to improve this legislation I'm for. But I want to be absolutely clear here that the overwhelming bulk of the package is sound, is designed to put people back to work, help states that are in desperate straits, help families who are losing jobs and health care, and it's designed to make sure that we've got green energy jobs for the future. In fact, most of the programs that have been criticized as part of this package amount to less than one percent of the overall package. And it makes for good copy, but here's the thing -- we can't afford to play the usual politics at a time when the economy continues to worsen.