Warren, Sanders Ready to Face Down Obama over Social Security, Medicare Cuts

[unhappycamper]

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/29-5



As budget negotiations restart, Obama, GOP still pushing austerity

Warren, Sanders Ready to Face Down Obama over Social Security, Medicare Cuts
Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer
Published on Tuesday, October 29, 2013 by Common Dreams

Though the 'deficit scold dream' of a so-called 'Grand Bargain' may be diminished on Capitol Hill, a mini-version—circulating among some as the 'Small Deal' version of a 2014 austerity budget—is still on the table as congressional budget negotiations are set to resume Wednesday.

With austerity proposals again taking the lead in the latest budget battle, however, at least two progressive senators, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, are ready to fight such a deal.

"Instead of talking about cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, we must end the absurdity of corporations not paying a nickel in federal income taxes," Senator Sanders, who is on the Senate and House budget conference committee, wrote in an op-ed in the LA Times Monday.

Pushing for progressive tax reform as opposed to further cuts to key social programs and earned benefits, Sanders added, "We cannot impose more austerity on people who are already suffering. When 95% of all new income between 2009 and 2012 went to the top 1%, and while tens of millions of working Americans saw a decline in their income, we cannot cut programs that working families depend on."

[tridim]

1. Chained-CPI FUD post #7286: Don't do what you have said you will not do, Mr. President. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Briefing room word games: What's a 'slash' versus a 'cut' in Social Security?

Briefing room word games: What's a 'slash' versus a 'cut' in Social Security?

[tridim]

5. Sorry DU, Chained CPI FUD post #7286.1:

President Obama has not and will never cut SS. And you know it.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. Well, he's called for cuts and offered cuts.

The Republicans even agreed to cuts in 2011, before they reversed themselves.

But Obama was just bluffing, right?

[tridim]

25. Obama has not and will never cut SS. nt

[PoliticAverse]

31. Is chained CPI a 'cut'? Because chained CPI was in the President's budget proposal...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/factsheet/chained-cpi-protections

The Budget contains the President’s compromise offer to Speaker Boehner from December. As part of that offer, the President was willing to accept Republican proposals to switch to the chained CPI. But, the Budget makes clear that the openness to chained CPI depends on two conditions. The President is open to switching to the chained CPI only if:

The change is part of a balanced deficit reduction package that includes substantial revenue raised through tax reform.

It is coupled with measures to protect the vulnerable and avoid increasing poverty and hardship.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

13. Under your reasoning, he would have never appointed the members of the Cat Food Commission.

But he did.



To her credit, Marie Antoinette at least suggested "Let them eat cake."

[tridim]

26. Obama has not, and will never cut SS. nt

[AnotherMcIntosh]

29. You just have to be more patient.

[Jackpine Radical]

43. Is there an echo in here?

[JoePhilly]

2. Still not happening.

The fight is between Dems and the GOP.

Yet CommonDreams is always looking for a Dem versus Dem fight.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. It's a man-bites-dog thing

Who ever heard of Democrats trying to cut Social Security? And Democrats revolting so visibly against a Democratic President?

Interesting stuff.

[tridim]

6. The President and almost all Democrats support strengthening Social Security, not cutting it.

You know that too.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

14. Then why did he appoint the Cat Food Commission? Why did he recommend the chained-CPI?

[tridim]

27. Obama has not and will never cut SS. nt

[AnotherMcIntosh]

30. You didn't answer the two questions.

"Then why did he appoint the Cat Food Commission? Why did he recommend the chained-CPI?"

[PoliticAverse]

33. Well Nancy Pelosi did indicate she thought the chained CPI proposal constituted 'strengthening' SS.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

41. Is this the same Nancy Pelosi whose first act in 2006 was to take impeachment off the table?

For whose benefit did she do this?

She represents the power brokers, not the ordinary people who pay into and rely upon Social Security.

[JoePhilly]

7. There's a revolt? A weak article on commondreams does not a revolt make.

The GOP demands cuts (an aspect of this that you and commondreams tend to ignore), the President dangles a carrot for them to chase, and Sanders, Warren, and others get to "defend" cuts.

As I have said over and over and over and over and over.

There will be no cuts.

To your credit, you've wised up and stopped making predictions on this matter. Better to keep the outrage abstract.

Having said that, I suspect that this thread will once again bring out the predictors of doom, all sure that THIS TIME, cuts are going to happen.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. And again... I predicted that Obama would call for cuts, and he did.

Then I predicted that he'd offer cuts, and he did.

Beyond that... no predictions.

Obama has a fetish for cutting Social Security. Whether Congress will let him is another matter. At this point, Democrats are in open revolt against Obama. I don't think they'll allow it.

[JoePhilly]

10. You were sure the cat food commission

was created to propose cuts that would be announced in the state of the union, and then implemented.

It did not happen. It's not going to happen. Yet, you still cling to this fantasy.

The one with the fetish is not the President, it's you.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

15. It was created to propose cuts.

[MannyGoldstein]

17. Nope. Link or slink.

Never said Obama would announce cuts at the SOTU, only that he'd call for cuts, which he did.

See, I know how our government works: Congress would need to approve any cuts. You should do some reading on how the government works, it's pretty interesting.

[1StrongBlackMan]

20. So you admit ...

all this "He calls for cuts" ...is so much of nothing?

[MannyGoldstein]

23. I admit that calling for cuts is calling for cuts. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. And as you pointed out ...

just a moment ago, calling for cuts, in this democracy, is pretty irrelevant as the Congress must act.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. So the defense is that the President is irrelevant?

That's a new one to me.

[1StrongBlackMan]

42. No ...

I'm just pointing out the inconsistent absurdity of your argument ... "President Obama called for cuts to entitlements, so it'll happen ... but it can't happen on his say so because Congress must act; but President Obama called for cuts."

That is so so tortured.

[MannyGoldstein]

45. I don't recall saying that it *would* happen.

I said that Obama would *call* for cuts, and *offer* cuts, which he did.

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. Okay manny. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

12. But you ...

seem to miss the fact that each time he called for and offered "cuts", he also called for increased revenue.

And this has demonstrated to everyone, except a few, that there will be no cuts because the cuts to "entitlements" that the modern gop says they want, they really don't want ... at least not enough to move on revenue.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

16. So even you admit that he has called for and offered "cuts".

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. I never have denied that ...

President Obama has offered the CCPI ... And, I note that WITH that offer, President Obama has called for INCREASED REVENUE. Can you admit that?

And do you recognize that time and again the increased revenue part is a poison pill that means the CCPI will go nowhere?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

21. Admit what? So he has called for increased revenue with CALLS FOR SS CUTS. Social Security doesn't

have anything to do with the general budget.

All politicians call for increased revenue.

The real news is that a President with a &quot D)" label is calling for Social Security cuts.

Even Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and Cheney didn't call for that.

[1StrongBlackMan]

22. Admit that ...

that time and again the increased revenue part is a poison pill that means the CCPI will go nowhere.

It's really pretty simple ... If you offer something that you know I will not accept, your offer is meaningless.

But in this case, President Obama's offering what the modern gop says it wants, only to have them reject it shows that the modern gop is unserious in their request ... and all but the most ardent of the hair on fire bunch seem to recognize this.

[JoePhilly]

28. Does the President go on TV and "call for cuts"?

This is an important point in this discussion.

There is a a difference between dangling a carrot in front of the GOP, to get them to REACH for it, and "calling for cuts".

See ... if the President really wanted to cut social security, he had a real chance to do it back when the economy was in free fall. He could have explained to the American people that the cuts were necessary to help stop that collapse. And the American people would have bought it.

But that did not happen. Why not?

Moving beyond the collapse, does the President go out on the stump, or on TV and "call for cuts". No. Why not?

Because he's not in favor of them. He's daring the GOP to reach for the brass ring.

DU works itself into a frenzy every couple months on this point. And the same folks who used to predict ACTUAL impending cuts, had to walk that back and yet remain outraged even though nothing actually has happened. And they know it isn't going to happen.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

32. Does he go on TV and call for SS cuts? As often as he goes on TV to promote his TPP.

[JoePhilly]

34. So your answer is no.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

35. Do you mean that he doesn't go on TV to tell us about his pending approval of the TPP

and how it is going to ship even more American manufacturing jobs to foreign countries?

No, he hasn't.

Agreed.

[JoePhilly]

37. I'd expect a right winger to change the subject when losing ...

and since I know you are not one of those, I'm surprised you'd use that tactic.

The key question that you won't try to answer on THIS topic ... Why didn't the President push for cuts back during the collapse? He had the perfect reason for doing it. And he had more than enough Democrats, plus Republicans to pull it off, right?

So if he's so hell bent on these cuts, why waste that opportunity?

And re-election isn't an option here ... he'd have sold the cuts as part of the required actions to stop the collapse, the crash would have still stopped, and he's be able to thank the American people for pitching in.

There will be no cuts. Its not happening.

And if you think it is happening, please, tell me when.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

39. I also expect a right winger to change the subject when losing. I've seen that many times.

[JoePhilly]

40. So stay on topic and you can avoid seeing it.

[eomer]

44. The President did do that, in 2011.

He did so in press conferences on July 11, July 15, July 22, August 15, and August 17 (all dates in 2011).

Here are some excerpts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022028229

[JoePhilly]

46. In each of those quotes ... what is the President doing?

He's dangling a brass ring in front of the GOP.

He's not "calling for cuts" ... he's saying ... "Ok, you want X, what will you give me for X?"

Every statement is highly conditional. He's says he's "willing to consider A, B, C", but not with out "x, y, z" in return.

And that's where so many on DU seem to get lost. If Obama wanted cuts to Social Security, he could have had them easily back in 2009. He could have made it part of stopping the collapse. And the American people would have done it willingly.

The GOP has been trying to create a collapse coupled with high debt and high deficits for exactly that reason, for decades. That's the perfect climate for selling SS cuts.

So again. The President has not been calling for cuts. If he were, there would be no need to create conditions, conditions that most of us know the GOP won't touch. He could have made such cuts happen a long time ago.

Going forward, the President and the Dems will remain "measured and reasonable" and the GOP will continue its slide into crazy land.

There will be no cuts. Its not happening.

[eomer]

48. He was speaking to the American people in town halls over a several week period.

He proposed it as part of a Grand Bargain so, yes, it was part of a proposal to Republicans but also a proposal to the American people.

[1StrongBlackMan]

11. No ...

There's a revolt? A weak article on commondreams does not a revolt make.

You' must be missing the revolt by the 13% of "progressives" that identify as Democrats ... sometimes.

[TinkerTot55]

19. May Sens. Sanders and Warren.....

...be President Obama's conscience, and his backbone.