If you're wondering what Obama gets in exchange for Chained CPI...

[Marr]

He gets Chained CPI. That is itself a long-time DLC/Third Way policy goal:

http://crfb.org/blogs/third-way-introduces-new-social-security-reform-plan

It's also very unpopular with just about everyone but the 1% Club. So it takes a lot of political cover to get the actual politicians to vote for it. And that's exactly what the White House has been doing on this issue from the beginning. Simpson/Bowles was one of the first bricks laid in that wall.

[on point]

1. The point of chained CPI is cash flow for the govt w/o the 1% having to pay

The1% used the SS surplus to justify their tax breaks. Now that the govt will have to start paying back the money they borrowed, they want to get seniors to pay the bill because the middle class is already tapped out!

Why not go to where the money is, the 1%?

No no no. That would defeat the purpose of thirty years of theft!

[CrispyQ]

43. This. ^^^

That would defeat the purpose of thirty years of theft!

Every major institution is set up to siphon money from the US Treasury to the 1%.

[davekriss]

52. Precisely correct!

[indepat]

65. How true. What a shame our President doesn't seem to realize this obvious fact

[shanti]

71. well, he also IS

one of the 1%

[danbeee46]

72. Wrong

Of course he realizes "this obvious fact." He just doesn't care. His priority is to reach a deal with the GOP even if it causes suffering among those least able to survive it.

[indepat]

74. Guess I should have added that little

thingy!

[jazzimov]

2. Actually, Chained CPI was originally suggested

to avoid the complete privatization of SS. That's what the 1% want, so they can get their greasy paws on all that $$$.

They don't want anything to save SS.

[truedelphi]

8. No, what the 1% want is to continually

Last edited Tue Apr 9, 2013, 03:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Drive the political discussions in this binary way. So that we do not have choices.

Look at last Nov's "election" -- Vote for Rmoney and get an authentic captain of Industry, who will screw us over, but will also take away women's access to reproductive health care. So then you end up feeling YOU HAVE to vote for Obama as although he is a willing puppet to the Captains of Industry, glad to continue the notion that the Big Bankers get it all, and are never going to be penalized for serious crimes, while they steal from us, he will at least give women access to health care.

Same with notion of "We will either privatized the Social Security monies or else, still evil but less evil, let's just do CPI."

We Americans need to insist that we can no longer survive if offered up these binary choices. We need to resurrect the idea that there needs to be at all times five or six choices for major issues.

Every nation that has backed away from endless wars without end, that has decent health care for its citizens, that insists on food safety (ie no Gm food) is also a nation wherein people demand more than "Evil or Less Evil" as their choices.

BTW many of us have already lost on Social Security as the date we an retire has been rolled back two years, so that the contract we signed off on when we entered the work force has been invalidated. And for that I think we need to seriously consider not voting for anyone who has ever been part of hurting this Social Program. it was a program founded by a damn Democrat, one Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

And if that program needs to be switched around now so that the Treasury make up for the Fed Reserve banker loans Geithner/Bernanke agreed to, then maybe it is time to say that we no longer have real Democrats in this party - it is just made up of sheep inside Wolves Clothing.

[CrispyQ]

46. I agree with every word.

I hope the talk of cutting SS is waking people up. I hope they take one night off from reality TV & educate themselves what TPB have in store for us. CNN/Fox/MSNBC/network news are not talking at all about the TPP. Hell, the way BP & Exxon were/are allowed to take over the scene of a disaster & keep the press away, get out of paying for the damage, we're halfway there already. The corpos want total control & then to "legalize" it. We are truly fucked, imo. Bloody revolution or environmental meltdown will be the only thing that changes anything.

It's great being a glass half empty type, in an insane world.

[BrotherIvan]

53. Spot on! When my Democratic friends would query

"Why would the Republicans run such a terrible candidate?" I would always laugh. I'm sure the PTB were surprised how many votes he did get. I'm sure they watched election night, tittering like ice cubes in crystal glasses, overjoyed that so many stupid sheeple would swallow even the cartoon of the robber baron fat cat.

They allowed Willard and even gramps McCain to run (both of whom they hate) because they had their candidate already who would give them everything they ever wanted all while placating the stupid liberals. Why do you think a state senator became the star of the 2004 convention? How do you think a first term senator could amass that kind of war chest before the 2008 primary even started? Do you think he didn't have to make any deals to do that? Timmy, Rahm and all the other corporate stooges were all part of the deal.

It costs nearly a BILLION dollars to run for the presidency. Does that tell you something?

[Maineman]

63. The Solution

How to Clean Up Government

Neutralize corporate, foreign, and other big (political) money. Cut corruption. Reclaim democracy.

1. Require structured campaigns. Campaigns would consist of
- a specified minimum number of broadcasted debates among all reasonably viable candidates
- equal numbers of interviews by professional media personnel
- biographical information or resume provided by the candidate and checked for accuracy by the media, no random reports disguised as news will be permitted.

2. If any primary media entity (TV, radio, newspaper, magazine) accepts an ad for one candidate, the ad may not be run until that media entity has ad buys for equal time from all reasonably viable opponents. All ads will be charged at equal rates.

3. Media entities that do not follow the rules will have their license suspended for a minimum of one year. This applies to all relevant prinicpals not just the name of the media entity.

4. Control of Internet communications would not be feasible, and should not be attempted.

[Plucketeer]

70. "it is just made up of sheep inside Wolves Clothing."

How many times do those phony sheep have to bite us on the ass before we WAKE UP???

[Dragonfli]

11. That doesn't make any sense.

It's like saying the suggestion to to rip out my kidney was made to avoid having all my organs taken.

The one suggesting it is likely the person that left me in a bathtub of ice sans one on my organs to sell to the black market. That person is not my friend, works for the organ black market, and is making a rationalization to himself that were it not for him his boss might have tried to take all my organs.

My true friend would suggest protecting me from the sociopaths that want my organs.

[jazzimov]

22. Let's talk about what makes sense and what doesn't.

The OP suggests that the Chained CPI was a goal in itself. How does that make any sense? Others have suggested that the 1% wanted it simply because they are "evil". How does that make sense?

If you remember, Jr tried to say that SS was in trouble and needed to be "saved" because of all the baby boomers and the reduced younger population. His suggestion was to privatize it and dump all that money into Wall Street. Do you not think that the 1% salivated at that prospect?

There were several other suggestions to "save" SS. One of these was to simply raise the cap. That idea is my personal choice. But Republicans rejected that out of hand because it was a "tax increase". It would have negatively impacted the 1%, plus they wouldn't get their greasy paws on the SS funds.

Another suggestion was to trim SS spending by switching to a Chained CPI. Although it would actually create savings which the Republicans claimed they wanted, it still would keep the 1% from getting their paws on all that SS funding. So, the Chained CPI is a bluff that Republicans will never go for.

Now, which makes more sense - that the 1% want Chained CPI just because they're "evil", or that they want to privatize SS so that they can get the benefit of all those SS funds?

[Dragonfli]

27. The op makes since to anyone that has read Will Marshall and the other PPI hacks

Or read anything at third way.org since the site opened, it is not the op's fault or mine if you have been so ill informed for so long.

They love this crap, they use all of Pete Peterson's talking points to attack the big three (have been for years)

The only thing they like more than "entitlement reforms (newspeak for cuts)" is free trade agreements or possibly lowering taxes and "streamlining regulations" for corporations. (streamlining regulations is newspeak for deregulation, a fact that becomes know when you read their articles using that term)

The only thing Democratic about these purchased by corporations hacks is their positive views on marriage equality and women's rights issues.

Obama didn't invent this shit, he just appears to be a loyal follower of theirs, it is not new, and it certainly is not a clever plan to "save us".

The entire fake dem centrist crap has been around since the mid to late eighties and their stated reason for forming has always been to allow Democrats to be competitive in receiving corporate donations and purging Democratic views and policies that made Democrats less electable by turning off more conservative Americans IOW Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans.

They are funded almost entirely by the 1% The old DLC had to rebranded because their Koch bros. connections became too well know for fucks sake.

Yes it does make sense that the 1% want these policies created by these think tanks they support financially. It is their way of slowly destroying social programs from one of their operative branches while shooting for a fast fascism from the other.

[raouldukelives]

42. And that is how the cookie crumbles. nt

[KoKo]

59. Thanks Dragonfli....This is a must read...

It's a "fact sheet" for those who are just waking up to what's been going on with the takeover of the Democratic Party for several decades now.

[truedelphi]

66. + My household. n/t

[JDPriestly]

32. It's probably a little of both

plus the right's historical vendetta against Social Security.

Raise the cap and also raise taxes on those who are subject to taxes and be done with it.

[jtuck004]

19. No it wasn't. It is just a wound on the way to cutting up the whole victim. n/t

[cliffordu]

73. ^^^^^^THIS IS WHAT THIS IS ABOUT^^^^^

[MotherPetrie]

3. K&R

[truedelphi]

4. Ah but -

The real thing that Obama and Michelle get with this happening is that they are now economically secure.
FOREVER!

Just as when Bill Clinton put Mike Taylor in charge of all scientific pronouncements about Monsanto's safety, and then several years later, Billie Boy signed off on the Bank Reform and Modernization Act, that took away the middle class' Glass Steagal protections, leading to the total collapse of the economy in Autumn 2008, and for all of that and more, Mr Clinton was able to get some $ 100K per speech in front of a Corporate Podium.

That is the real quid pro quo here.

The only thing Former Pres Clinton had going for him that Mr Obama doesn't is that back in the Nineties, the internet was not quite as informative to all aspects of life in the USA as it is now. Clinton pulled the wool over the average American's eyes in a way that this president can only dream of.

[CrispyQ]

48. I don't understand why so many dems have such love of Clinton.

There's someone on DU who says something to the effect of "destroying great things that democrats of the past have put in place, can only be accomplished by democrats."

The repubs want to drive the car over the cliff like Thelma & Louise. The dems are willing to just walk up to the cliff & then jump. I'm 55. I guess I vote dem cuz if we walk instead of drive, I won't see the cliff. What an inspiring thing to vote for. Not.

[customerserviceguy]

5. Chained CPI has another effect

You know that annual adjusting for inflation that's done for personal exemptions, standard deductions, and the very tax brackets themselves? If chained CPI is applied to them, it results in a gradual increase in income taxes for those who pay them.

That's why the Rethugs may think twice on applying this. It seems like the only way out of this is gridlock.

[starroute]

14. Boehner seems willing to accept it

There was something posted here a couple of days ago where Boehner seemed to be saying that he would grudgingly accept the tax increases resulting from chained CPI in exchange for the benefit cuts -- and that he regarded this as a generous compromise.

[customerserviceguy]

34. He no longer leads his party

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz do. What they say will have more effect than the Weeper of the House.

[Bluenorthwest]

6. DLC/Third Way people are responsible for this, and we need to hang it around their necks and sink

these greedy thieving pretenders.

[HereSince1628]

7. Nothing but a place from which to start the really meaningful compromises.

[Armstead]

37. You don't start a compromise with a surrender

[HereSince1628]

39. You are absolutely right. -I- wouldn't, but Obama DOES

[ProSense]

9. Actually,

"If you're wondering what Obama gets in exchange for Chained CPI..."

...it dates back more than a decade. It was a response to this:

The Boskin Commission, formally called the "Advisory Commission to Study the Consumer Price Index", was appointed by the United States Senate in 1995 to study possible bias in the computation of the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is used to measure inflation in the United States. Its final report, titled "Toward A More Accurate Measure Of The Cost Of Living" and issued on December 4, 1996, concluded that the CPI overstated inflation by about 1.1 percentage points per year in 1996 and about 1.3 percentage points prior to 1996.

The report was important because inflation, as calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, is used to index the annual payment increases in Social Security and other retirement and compensation programs. This implied that the federal budget had increased by more than it should have, and that projections of future budget deficits were too large. The original report calculated that the overstatement of inflation would add $148 billion to the deficit and $691 billion to the national debt by 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boskin_Commission

INTRODUCING THE CHAINED CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
http://www.bls.gov/cpi/super_paris.pdf

[cantbeserious]

10. Just Proves That The 1% Have Been Pushing This Agenda For Decades - Obama Is Falling For It

eom

[PufPuf23]

13. Obama is not stupid, he is complicit and premeditated this

travesty of long held Democratic Party values and heartless heed to social justice.

Obama was honest in describing himself as a 1980s moderate Republican.

I got my first post ever hidden today at DU for typing an uncomfortable truth.

[cantbeserious]

15. I Agree That This Is Premeditated - With Wall Street - Obama Has Proven His Support For The 1%

What He Needs To Propose Is The Progressive Caucus budget.

-----------------

The People’s Budget eliminates the deficit in 10 years, puts Americans back to work and restores our economic competitiveness. The People’s Budget recognizes that in order to compete, our nation needs every American to be productive, and in order to be productive we need to raise our skills to meet modern needs.

Our Budget Eliminates the Deficit and Raises a $31 Billion Surplus In Ten Years
Our budget protects Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and responsibly eliminates the deficit by targeting its main drivers: the Bush Tax Cuts, the wars overseas, and the causes and effects of the recent recession.

Our Budget Puts America Back to Work & Restores America’s Competitiveness
• Trains teachers and restores schools; rebuilds roads and bridges and ensures that users help pay for them
• Invests in job creation, clean energy and broadband infrastructure, housing and R&D programs

Our Budget Creates a Fairer Tax System
• Ends the recently passed upper-income tax cuts and lets Bush-era tax cuts expire at the end of 2012
• Extends tax credits for the middle class, families, and students
• Creates new tax brackets that range from 45% starting at $1 million to 49% for $1 billion or more
• Implements a progressive estate tax
• Eliminates corporate welfare for oil, gas, and coal companies; closes loopholes for multinational corporations
• Enacts a financial crisis responsibility fee and a financial speculation tax on derivatives and foreign exchange

Our Budget Protects Health
• Enacts a health care public option and negotiates prescription payments with pharmaceutical companies
• Prevents any cuts to Medicare physician payments for a decade

Our Budget Safeguards Social Security for the Next 75 Years
• Eliminates the individual Social Security payroll cap to make sure upper income earners pay their fair share
• Increases benefits based on higher contributions on the employee side

Our Budget Brings Our Troops Home
• Responsibly ends our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to leave America more secure both home and abroad
• Cuts defense spending by reducing conventional forces, procurement, and costly R&D programs

Our Budget’s Bottom Line
• Deficit reduction of $5.6 trillion
• Spending cuts of $1.7 trillion
• Revenue increase of $3.9 trillion
• Public investment $1.7 trillion

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/the-peoples-budget/

[PufPuf23]

16. Much better budget proposal not to mention political tactics. Thanks.

[on point]

25. This I support and is what real dems should be pushing. Not this rw garbage

[Art_from_Ark]

38. Exactly

[xtraxritical]

51. K&R Progressive Caucus!

[CrispyQ]

60. Thank you for this.

I support this budget. Why doesn't the President?

[truebrit71]

17. Couldn't agree more..

[Dawgs]

40. Welcome. Mine get hidden all of the time.

[rhett o rick]

30. Pres Obama is offering the Chained CPI because it is what the Republicans want. He wouldnt offer

them something they dont want. Boner is laughing because he knows that he has Pres Obama's number. Next offer by The Big Boner will be for more.

[JoePhilly]

35. So is it your prediction that Obama will cut a deal with Boehner this time?

My prediction is that it will not happen.

[rhett o rick]

54. Hell no! Where did you get that? Boner wont deal. Why offer him cuts in SS?

Now Democrats have to run on "we might cut SS". Since we know that The Boner isnt going to deal, why not show the American people that Democrats wouldnt even consider cutting SS?

I think The Boner will ask for bigger cuts to SS and Medicare and see how far he can push the President. He knows Pres Obama is willing to cut SS as part of a "balanced approach" for the best of all Americans, he just doesnt know how much the Pres will be willing to cut.

[JoePhilly]

55. Wrong.

Democrats from blue areas will scream NO CUTS! (see Bernie Sanders). Their constituents will like it.

Democrats from reddish / purple areas will say "We tried to find a compromise". Their constituents will like it.

It is the GOP that has nothing to run on.

Boehner can't push anything. He can't ask for more in cuts because he can't propose ANY added revenue (even if its less than what Obama included). To even try it, the GOP House will attempt to remove him from the speaker role.

There is not going to be a deal. Boehner has no room to maneuver.

[rhett o rick]

57. Wrong??? Isnt that a bit rude? Because you disagree doesnt make me wrong.

Boner didnt like the deal and rejected it. That means he wants more and can ask for bigger cuts.

[JoePhilly]

62. You said ...

Now Democrats have to run on "we might cut SS"

That's simply wrong. They have to do no such thing.

And Boehner has always been able to ask for bigger cuts. In fact he HAS been asking for bigger cuts. The GOP has been doing so forever. Nothing about that has changed.

[rhett o rick]

64. Pres Obama the leader of the Democratic Party put SS cuts on the table.

That's not wrong. Now Congressional Democrats will have to defend or support cuts to SS. Are you saying that is wrong?

And I agree that The Boner has been asking for more and more. So why, oh why did Pres Obama offer cuts to SS?

[Larrylarry]

47. The speaker would never accept any of the Presidents plan

Simply because they contain text increases

[JoePhilly]

58. There is a second reason Boehner can't accept ...

Accepting Obama's proposal would require Boehner and the GOP to take the position that Obama's proposal is a suitable replacement for the kinds of the changes the GOP has been calling for.

Accepting Obama's proposal would effectively shut down the GOP's efforts to kill these programs at any point in the near future. I can't see them doing that.

[Dragonfli]

76. All that texting really hurts, they have a very limited data plan on their smartphones.

[paleotn]

12. Why don't the DLC crowd....

...cut the damn pretenses and join the republican party. Then, maybe, the rethugs would actually have a "moderate" wing.

[Dragonfli]

28. Infiltration, and false flag attacks on seniors wouldn't work without the false flag or pretense

[jeff47]

29. Because of their history. They've been wrong about EVERYTHING

Including which political party they belong to.

[Cleita]

50. I have been begging for that since they reared their ugly heads.

Please go be the Republican Lites that you are. Either form a new party or take over the Republican Party, but let the Party of labor and the common people be what it's been traditionally.

[L0oniX]

75. Clinton's join the GOP? O my. n/t

[ProfessionalLeftist]

18. Obama appointed Alan Simpson & Erskine Bowles to his goddamned catfood commission...

...here is Pete Peterson's "Fix the Debt" (off the backs of Seniors and the Poor) "Leadership" list. The first two names? Guess...

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Fix_the_Debt%27s_Leadership

Obama knew exactly what he was doing...the objective of these bastards is to DESTROY Social Security by stealth and Chained CPI if not the entire methodology for this destruction - is at least the first blast at it.

[JDPriestly]

33. Another post that should be an OP.

Please start a thread with that information. I did not know that about the two commissions or committees.

[KoKo]

61. +1...and those who early on called it the "Catfood Commission"

were treated like lepers here. The site that did the most work exposing the "Commission" and named it "Catfood Commission" was constantly under attack.

They were correct. It was an early warning of where Obama and Democratic leadership were going. But, few wanted to hear it.

[MNBrewer]

20. LEAVE BRITTANY ALONE!

*sigh*

[DhhD]

21. Social Security was never brought up during the three 2012 Presidential Debates.

So, we the people, had to have realized that Obama was in agreement with Mitt about privatization. Mitt Romney mentioned other privatizations like the IDEA, an education fund. There was no opposition from the Democratic nominee about privatization within the US Department of Education, either. During the first debate, there was little opposition to the Republican Platform from the opposing sitting president. Romney did all the talking with very little opposition.

Did somebodies already promise the Presidency to Obama before the debates?

[silvershadow]

23. When will they ever learn that it is NOT their money? nt

[alfredo]

24. If he really wanted it, why did he insist on revenue as a non

negotiable part of the package. He said he'd only give them chained CPI if they'd give him the closing of loopholes beneficial only for the rich?

[JoePhilly]

36. I'd add ...

What he's really said is he's willing to CONSIDER giving them chained CPI for additional revenues.

There is no legislation.

Boehner and the GOP House would have to write the legislation, and include the details. And there's the rub.

There is no way for Boehner to craft a bill that the House GOP would accept and that Obama would not veto. Not that it would ever come to that. Any bill would die in the Senate.

In reality, Obama has offered Boehner the chance to hang himself. Boehner can't even attempt to agree to Obama's proposal without having the House GOP nut jobs demand he step down as speaker.

[alfredo]

41. And our outrage undercuts their narrative that Obama is unwilling to meet them half way.

[JoePhilly]

45. Also true ...

The posts on DU which encourage folks to call, write, email, fax their representatives and demand no cuts are very useful.

Running around DU with one's hair on fire ... not so useful.

[alfredo]

56. Obama is the master of Rope a Dope. Ali got booed for using that technique, but

it worked. Opponents knew what he was doing, but kept punching in hope of landing a good punch.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. Wasting money by giving it to other countries for war mondering

so they cut SS here grrr!

[Capn Sunshine]

31. RAISE THE CAP. period.

Those interested in "saving " SS have to recognize that salaries have increased and that
$ 250,000 is a common salary in the middle management echelons and higher in corporate America. Removing the cap would in my estimation keep the system solvent through 2100.

No matter what, the CAP needs to go.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

44. What does he get? It couldn't be a better retirement plan for himself, could it?

[Cleita]

49. I'm on Social Security. I paid all my bills yesterday.

I have $36 left until I get my next payment on the 24th. That's my grocery money. It will buy cat food...for the cat. Fortunately, I have a couple of pet sitting jobs before then that will give me extra money. However, going over my expenses, I realized my biggest outlay is for insurance and gas for my car. Public transportation is not an option for me. I live rurally and we don't have it. If the government did something to help seniors, well actually everyone, with these two expenses, it would reduce our COLA in a big way. Then there would be no need for a chained CPI.

[DaveT]

67. Tactics, Schmactics

The idea that proposing a budget with Social Security cuts in it does anything bad to Boehner or the Republicans is nonsense. Polling shows no demographic group favors it -- neither Democrats, nor Republicans nor Independents. The Republican Party as an institution does not favor it.

The GOP is always careful to phrase their demented attacks on Social Security as strengthening it or saving it.

Now our 11th Dimensional Chess Master owns the idea of cutting SS benefits -- he is the only major voice in our entire political culture favoring it. The assumption that this is not a serious proposal, but instead a gimmick to trap the GOP is based on nothing more than cognitive dissonance. It does not put the GOP into a "box." It puts President Obama into his own trap, just as in his first term when his continuous groveling before the Tea Party turned the Congress and many State Legislatures over to the Republican Party -- and subsequent gerrymandering to keep the House in GOP hands.

The Average Voter does not follow the blow by blow of legislation. The only thing that the general public will hear out of this is that Obama wants to cut Social Security -- not the purported, Obama is even willing to cut Social Security to get the GOP to raise taxes on the wealthy.

Nobody thinks that cutting Social Security is a good idea. On a parallel issue, Romney and Ryan grasped the populist point and attacked Obama from his left on his "cuts" to Medicare. This did not teach Obama anything -- and now that he has won re-election he is free to pursue his stated goal of the "Grand Bargain" to trade entitlements for tax increases.



I would like to hear from Obama defenders who claim that he is not really going to cut Social Security and that this is just a tactic -- what do you think of the President's basic premise of fiscal "balance" -- getting some form of tax increase in exchange for cuts in entitlements?

I believe that approach is bad public policy and even worse politics. What say the loyalists?

[Marr]

68. Well said-- I could not agree more.

The continued insistence from defenders that this is part of some brilliant fake out is just pathetically delusional at this point.

[Jakes Progress]

69. Yep. It took nixon

to go to China. No Democratic president could do that.

It took Obama to cut SS. No republican president could do that. The powers that be knew that when they picked the republican candidates.