Pelosi: My Deficit Committee Members Will Oppose All Entitlement Benefit Cuts

[kpete]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Pelosi: My Deficit Committee Members Will Oppose All Entitlement Benefit Cuts
Brian Beutler | August 2, 2011, 2:32PM


The debt limit fight is over, but the fight over entitlement programs will continue for months. In the weeks ahead, the leaders of both parties in both the House and Senate will name three members each to a new committee tasked with reducing the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion.

The ultimate makeup of that committee is key. It will determine whether this Congress will pass further fiscal legislation, and, thus, what the major themes of the 2012 election will be.

At a pre-recess press conference Tuesday afternoon, TPM asked House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) whether the people she appoints to the committee will make the same stand she made during the debt limit fight -- that entitlement benefits -- as opposed to provider payments, waste and other Medicare spending -- should be off limits.

...........

"That is a priority for us," Pelosi said. "But let me say it is more than a priority - it is a value... it's an ethic for the American people. It is one that all of the members of our caucus share. So that I know that whoever's at that table will be someone who will fight to protect those benefits."

Read more: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/pelosi-my-deficit-committee-members-will-oppose-all-entitlement-benefit-cuts.php?ref=fpblg

[ananda]

1. End the six "wars."

nt

[harun]

23. That should save some $$$

[Divine Discontent]

58. just a few Yuan, I'd think!

the focus on defending American shores all around the world (to take a line from the amusing Archie Bunker) is a travesty! we need a focus on green policies and infrastructure to create jobs. He's gotta take this fight to the people more directly. And we have to get the teanuts out of office.

[BNJMN]

87. The Progressive Caucus is larger than the Tea Party one. Maybe we should expect more from our side?

[FiveGoodMen]

2. Just initially, or all the way to the end?

We'll be watching, Nancy.

[Doctor_J]

25. Beep, beep, beep

http://www.truth-out.org/president-reverse/1312300026

[FiveGoodMen]

33. Yup. That's what worries me.

[pscot]

38. Beep, beep, beep

Devastating op-ed. Made me edit my sig line.

[Doctor_J]

40. Then be sure to rec the post over in E&A

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x618064

[alp227]

27. I'm gonna telephone Pelosi's office tomorrow and urge her to keep her promise

as well as my rep Zoe Lofgren. I'm glad you're expressing skepticism towards Congress as we all should, regardless of party.

[INdemo]

39. Read Rep. Conyers had to say about the SS Medicare cuts

It was Obama that put them on the table in the first place...So what is Nancy Pelsoi suppose to do..After all those speeches that Obama will make and tell us he will not allow cuts on Seniors etc..he will negotiate only with Republicans again and again we well be screwed..Never mind some panel made up of Democrats and Republicans..To Obama its only the Republicans that count....

[Doctor_J]

41. Holy crap. Conyers continues to get pissed

Where is this quote from?

[INdemo]

44. Here is what Rep. Conyers had to say about the SS Cuts

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/conyers-obama-proposed-social-security-c

[alp227]

Brent Bozell's CNS News? Please don't post right wing tripe like this.

try .

The website conwebwatch.tripod.com has many criticisms of CNS News on blogs and long-form articles too.

[INdemo]

57. Ok..want to see his comments here on a progressive blog

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Rep-Conyers-Obama-Demand-by-Jeanine-Molloff-110729-352.html

[No Elephants]

79. Conyers is right wing tripe now? There is a video of Conyers saying that Obama

was the one who wanted the OASDI cuts and it was not Boehner who asked for them. If it's a true story, where it appears is irrelevant.

[No Elephants]

78. You'd do better to call Boehner and Reid. Nancy's peeps will be in the minority.

[Luciferous]

46. That's what I'm afraid of. It seems like she talks a good talk, but then

when it comes down to it she gives in.

[bvar22]

83. When Push comes to Shove,

Nancy stands wherever the Democratic Party leadership TELLS her to stand.
Sad, really.

[No Elephants]

77. Doesn't matter. He picks will be in the minority.

[jsamuel]

3. why don't we get it overwith and just make it a 1 on 1 battle to the death like they used to do

You know, like each side picks their best warrior and whoever doesn't die wins.

(sarcasm)

[Angry Dragon]

6. I think they should do that with wars also

would have been nice to see bush and cheney on a battlefield for a change

[spectre10]

42. There's just one problem with that...

...could you imagine if the outcome of a war was determined by some of the Tea Partiers like Louie Gohmert out there having to fight?

"We want to have a clean fight, now come to the center and shake ha... Louie, you're fist-bumping the corner post and your helmet is on backwards."

[Myrina]

49. Agree 1000000%

That'd end our urge to 'spread democracy' quick, fast n' in a hurry.

[On the Road]

54. Serj Tankian Agrees with You

BYOB

[dragonlady]

72. There was a TV ad many, many years ago

Perhaps it was in the 1960s, I don't remember exactly when. It showed two gray-haired men in suits climbing to the top of a wind-swept hill, taking off their jackets and handing them to their aides, and starting to punch at each other. The voice-over said something to the effect that we'd be better off if nations settled their differences that way. I was young then, but it has stayed with me. Does anyone else remember this?

[Sherman A1]

4. We will see

I am no longer very "hopeful with the change."

[Larkspur]

5. Good for Pelosi. What will Reid's committee members do?

If the Dems split between those for and against cuts to the Big 3, then the Rethugs win again.

[Mnpaul]

26. Harry Reid's picks will be the ones

that sell us out. Count on it.

[roxiejules]

47. Make no mistake

That is what the Super Committee is all about....cutting 'entitlements'.


http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/randy-wray-the-budget-compromise-%e2%80%93-congress-creates-a-rube-goldberg-doomsday-machine.html

[No Elephants]

80. The Super Committee is about disguising who wants the cuts for re-election purposes.

The members will be people who could not be pried out of their seats in the next election with a crow bard. And everyone else, including Obama, who has wanted the cuts all along, will say, "We could do nothing!"

[Jim_Shorts]

60. Like Kent Conrad ?

It will only take 1 defector to pass anything out of committee and Mitch McConnell has said all tax increases will be off the table. We are going to get one ugly Xmas present.

[David__77]

7. Medicare, not bombs!

Stop the funding for wars against Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.

[libmom74]

8. Sorry Nancy I don't believe

you anymore.

[Firebrand Gary]

9. That's a start....Medicare not Bombs.

Let's wait and see what the Senate does.

[Bozita]

11. no more freedom bombs?

[KansDem]

61. ...or "Peace Predators"

[HereSince1628]

10. Sure. I believe you, But what about Senator Nelson's super committee?

It's only going to take one conservo-dem to create the simple majority needed to pass a bill out for an unamended vote under conditions that have suspended the constitution and legislative rules.

[enlightenment]

13. Alternately, total gridlock in the committee, so

the deadline passes and the trigger is pulled - but not before Congress manages to take DOD funding almost completely off the table, so the majority of the slashing will be to social programs.

I suspect that's been the plan from the outset, but they seem to be running a political version of Neil Oram's 'The Warp', so it's taking a long, long time to reach the finale.

[Liberalynn]

17. +1

[JJW]

12. Impeachment is off the table!

Nancy could have stopped the Bush/Cheney raid of the treasury and those illegal wars with no bid contractors. But, no she took impeachment off the table and then Mr. O, desired to look forward and allow war criminals to go free.

[lark]

31. Was that Nancy's idea, or was she being dutiful solider

to Obama as the commander in chief?

[No Elephants]

81. Obama was not commander in chief when Annunziata cleaned the table of impeachment.

[Little Star]

14. Which side of her mouth is she talking out of this time?

[russspeakeasy]

15. the rest of the headline reads "for about 5 minutes".

[EFerrari]

16. "Until they don't".

[emsimon33]

18. They are not entitlements; we paid for them!

[valerief]

29. They are entitlements. That's what they were called in Social Security Act. nt

[sofa king]

56. I think you're both right.

Social Security is an entitlement, but the right to the entitlement is purchased by the beneficiary. It's not based on a basic inalienable right, only the right of the little guy to get back what he paid in.

Go ask the American Indians how that sort of deal worked out for them. You'll see your future, 'cause we're all Indians now.

[grahamhgreen]

19. And then, they will cave.

[Cool Logic]

20. Yeah, I think we have heard that one before.

:rofl:

[FreeStateDemocrat]

21. Only until the Obama tells her to cave-in again and this pronouncement never happened.

Pelosi at the end of the day is fighting for the real rich like herself (58millions).

[No Elephants]

84. 58 million in 2009. It's probably increased since then.

[IamK]

22. She may oppose cuts but that doesn't mean she wouldn't vote for them...

[roxiejules]

24. The 'entitlement' programs were not off the table very long

n/t

[valerief]

28. I'm sure we'll have Baucus or Conrad from the Senate giving away our entitlements. nt

[No Elephants]

85. Obama

Obama, Sept. 20: And I’ll protect Social Security, while John McCain wants to privatize it. Without Social Security half of elderly women would be living in poverty – half. But if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would’ve had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week. Millions would’ve watched as the market tumbled and their nest egg disappeared before their eyes. Millions of families would’ve been scrambling to figure out how to give their mothers and fathers, their grandmothers and grandfathers, the secure retirement that every American deserves. So I know Senator McCain is talking about a "casino culture" on Wall Street – but the fact is, he’s the one who wants to gamble with your life savings.

http://factcheck.org/2008/09/obamas-social-security-whopper/ Fact Check called this a whopper as to McCain. However, it turned out to be whopper as to Social Security, too.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/15/AR2009011504114.html (2009, shortly before inauguration)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-debt-talks-obama-offers-social-security-cuts/2011/07/06/gIQA2sFO1H_story.html (July, 2011)

Yeah, we hung health care "reform" on Baucus and now we'll probably also blame someone else for cuts to Medicare and Social Security, but it's Obama's agenda, not Blue Dogs, not Boehner, Obama.

"In the speech, Conyers said, "We’ve got to educate the American people at the same time we educate the President of the United States. The Republicans, Speaker Boehner or Majority Leader Cantor did not call for Social Security cuts in the budget deal. The President of the United States called for that. My response to him is to mass thousands of people in front of the White House to protest this."

http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/democratic-member-conyers-blasts-president-for-proposing-cuts-social-security

[lark]

30. Whoohoo Nancy!

Be strong, appoint strong Dems, ones that actually care about working people, like Grivajala (sp?) and Franks. Throw a monkey wrench into this planned theft of the working classes money.

[Emillereid]

32. I just love this woman! Go Nancy Go!

[shanti]

34. and then

when the repukes pick their six (who will vote for cuts) and "our side" picks their six, they'll still be at a standstill? makes a lot of sense :eyes:

[LynnTTT]

43. Won't be a standoff

cause the GOP will stick and a Dem will decide to "be reasonable'

[robcon]

35. I was pretty sure the Dems would do this. But what about the Repugs?

Nancy doesn't have the final word.

[patrice]

36. Since the opposition is going to bring it all down on our heads A - N - Y - W - A - Y , why don't we

at least consider going there?

Why must we pay for the bad business decisions that got our opposition over a financial barrel? They OWE us GOOD jobs for 30 years of Tax Cuts. THEY are defaulting on THAT agreement. When people screw up bad enough, they get fired, right?

[roxiejules]

45. +1000 n/t

[patrice]

53. There's something to be said for getting AHEAD of where some folks are going!!

[rpannier]

37. Yeah right

We've heard this song a dozen times before.
She has not backed up her words with actions.
Not buying it.

[Myrina]

48. Yeah. I *so* believe that.

An' you got a bridge you want to sell me, cheap, too, right?

:eyes:

[peace frog]

50. Nancy, much as I would love to place my faith in you

I can't. Next.

[Marnie]

51. Hey Nancy. We just watched you pulled an Obama.

Which is to say you caved.

Why should we believe anything you say relative to standing firm?

[sofa king]

52. And right here is how the rest of the President's deficit plan will be enacted.

Because if Congress can't agree on the cuts to make (and it won't), $500 billion automatically gets taken out of the Department of Defense, the one cash-cow that has remained sacred all this time, and likely the most inefficient Department in the executive branch.

Un-frigginbelievable. The President tied the details of his own plan to the certain failure of Congress, and there is almost no chance that Congress will succeed.

And not one damned Democrat in Congress has to vote to cut defense spending to make it happen automatically. They can vote against cutting defense spending, and it will still happen automatically.

Wow!

[blank space]

55. The best thing about the most recent democratic capitulation is

that the real kick in the guts for average Americans was hidden away from the debt debate -
and saved up just in time for Christmas and New Year !


Instead of having to discuss the sacrifices the people will have to endure as a result of the debt crisis -
they will be realised as a consequence of the debt, not raising the borrowing limit - there will be no correlation.


The fact that they have kicked the can down the road, the kick em in the nuts can, the destruction of
the state welfare system is pure political genius.

The reality is that the poor will be taken out behind the tool shed down the bottom of the garden and financially, politically,
and socially raped - while the media focuses on Christmas - and any discussion surrounding it will be entirely based
on the fact that something has to be done about the debt - because THAT WILL BE THE REASON TOUTED for the economic woes of the nation, nothing to do with borrowing limits

And just so Obama can deflect attention from himself over this issue - the committee who decides this issue will be out of his hands,
it will be republican / tea party with hard core neo-liberal institutional economists - Chicago School through and through like Obama - in other words they will slash the welfare system like Freddy Kruger on a Friday Night Fright Night. But Obama was there to reach compromise, to strike a deal, to maintain sanity, and get the best possible deal in the face of irreconcilable factions, sacrifices had to be made by both sides.

The borrowing level is more important,slash, the debt is more important, slash, future generations, slash, fiscal responsibility, slash,
- but we managed to save welfare payments for the first 12 weeks of unemployment !!


Obama's politics is death by a thousand cuts - each one only a slight concession, until Freddy Kruger has slashed his way through the entire body of American values and left the shredded carcass of social morality splattered across the floor of the house and senate.

Book mark this post - its going to happen.

[Divine Discontent]

59. We can stop them from doing these things, and we have to fight. If there's no point in fighting,

then we shouldn't even be talking about it - but there is a way out, and we have to organize and get mad (as Keith said)! I hope a major rally is held in a few months somewhere, and again just before the election. I will do everything I can to go to one of them. We must keep encouraging people to vote in progressives during the primaries. I have done my fair share of changing votes of those I can reach, we all gotta do it. We can beat these horrible policies that are against the people. Teanuts must GO!

[blank space]

63. Let me be as clear as I possibly can

rallies are absolutely, 100%, no questions asked, meaningless.

In fact they are worse than meaningless - they symbolize the flaccid, impotent, quivering, eviscerated bunch of kowtowing, pusillanimous, obsequious sheep THE PEOPLE have become.


Protesting and marching once had a real and genuine power as a show of force from the people, something the government should, and did, fear and respect as a very real and violent threat to their legitimacy and continuity. This has been removed, an act of self mutilation, of self castration - now it is a peaceful, orderly procession of the damned re-enacting the past. It is like some strange play, a performance piece, a stage show recreating great battles and the conquests of historical war heroes - but the cast truly believe they are themselves as brave as the characters they portray and not the reality that they are nothing more than an esoteric expressive dance, more scoffed and ridiculed than observed, yet alone taken seriously.

It is just so incredibly sad to watch - people genuinely believing that this diluted, insipid vague and distant reference to the incredibly powerful and brave acts that formed the REALITY of historical civil disobedience and protest is somehow equivalent, and even more depressing in its disillusionment, somehow just as effective.

Yeah, ring up, send in a fax, write yo your representative, email them and protest. These guys are waging bloody robotic warfare against millions of people all over the world - destroying entire civilizations - and you guys truly, honestly believe that peace march down main street is going to even come up on their radar.

We the people have become so masochistic in our self destruction that we are like stealth constituents - we are entirely invisible to them.

A peace march to them is nothing more than quaint, it would bring a tear of nostalgia to their eye as they reminisce upon the once great nation they have little choice but to euthanize for its own good, as it has become so infected with passivity and ineptitude.

Yeah - you go march. Should make a massive difference.

[Divine Discontent]

65. based on the anti-rally commentary you provide, I take it then you have

a better manner of solving these problems you'd like to inform us about?

I believe large rallies help bring people of like minds together to network and gain knowledge, plan local action, and teaches people who had no idea about the rallies about what is going on, by seeing their friends facebook updates, email, conversations when they return, and getting people registered to vote.

[blank space]

69. Clearly working out for you hey ?

What have been the biggest and most important rallies over the past ten years - Anti Iraq war and WTO anti globalisation.

They affected change well.

Here is a great big massive tip - no one needs to be made aware of anything. We all know, everyone knows - its the world of the internet champ - everyone knows.

What are you going to do about it - have a rally to plan more rallies ?

Seriously - I have no idea what to say to you - you simply have no idea what to do beyond - "lets rally".

You know you dont, I know you dont, we all know we dont.

It is just so, so, so, sad. Don Quixote - yelling at that windmill.

[Divine Discontent]

70. thanks for joining in the fight

here, I'll provide you with something good...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QawpCqdmznQ

[No Elephants]

86. Do you have an alternative, or are you recommending doing nothing?

[Better Believe It]

62. What about increasing the retirement age, changing the cost-of-living formula, means testing, etc.,

Will Pelosi's appointments also fight those changes?

[madrchsod]

64. "the future is so bright i`ve got to wear shades"

they better fight .....

[Hotler]

66. lalalalalalalalalala I can't hear you Nancy. n/t

[unkachuck]

67. "....someone who will fight to protect those benefits."

....that's it nancy, now get tough....

[zogofzorkon]

68. Government by Central Committee, what could possibly go wrong.

[Lorien]

71. Yeah right, we've already been through this:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/02/23/democrats

[closeupready]

73. Yes, she said, "I am for the strongest possible public option." We see how, as House Leader,

that meant nothing, at the end of the day.

[Lorien]

74. Yeah, right-because you know that you won't have the votes:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/02/23/democrats

[myrna minx]

75. Yes, until they don't. n/t

[MessiahRp]

76. That's okay all it takes is one Right-Center "Moderate" and that can come from the Senate easy.

Dick Durbin or someone like that who has already said that SS and Medicare cuts are not a bad idea. All it takes is one traitorous vote. You know the GOP Committee members will be in lockstep together.

Rp

[The Stranger]

82. Why in the fuck would she announce this?

Just have them do it and everyone keep their mouths shut.

Pelosi Disaster -- say it with me.