According to Mark Knoller, the agreement allows for cuts to SS and Medicare

[graywarrior]

I'm in holding pattern but if that truly is the case, then I am also done.

[babylonsister]

1. Hmmm. Don't know if it's that cut and dried; I just posted

Steve Benen's take on it. It's all pretty confusing to moi, but there are a lot of 'if this happens, then this might happen'. According to Benen...

If you’re looking for good news in this agreement, you’ll be looking for a long time. Overall, what we’re left with is bad news and less-bad news.

And what’s the less-bad news? There are a few noteworthy angles: (1) if the trigger kicks in, Medicaid and Social Security would be walled off and protected, and while the domestic cuts could affect Medicare, the cuts would be limited to Medicare providers, not beneficiaries

[graywarrior]

4. At this point, I don't know what to be concerned about more, the agreement

or the fact that my work hours have been cut to 12 per week, my brother is nearly homeless, and I have barely enough money to buy food every month. Plus I'm failing math and I cancelled Netflix.

[Supersedeas]

8. Medicare providers will in turn limit their services to Medicare beneficiaries

[OHdem10]

2. The first installment of cuts should be prepared and ready for

an up or down vote by Senate and House around T'giving.
If the Senate and or House cannot agree the SUPER CONG Plan,
the trigger is automatic across the board ccuts in everything
including Medicare and Defense.

Medicare is Dem. ICON and Defense is Repub ICON.

Medicare SS and Medicaid were never taken off the table.

As we go through the various phazes, yes we will get to
the Dems Big Three.

Republicans insisted that these be on the table. WE WERE
UPSET WITH OBAMA BECAUSE HE MADE A SPEECH and PUT THEM
ON THE TABLE BEFORE REPUBLICANS EVEN ASKED.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Explain why Social Security and Medicaid would be walled off in the trigger

if they planned to cut them on the front end? It doesn't make any sense. The trigger mechanism is designed precisely to protect Social Security and Medicaid (and Medicare beneficiaries): there are no negative consequences to voting down Social Security cuts in the Joint Commission, since it can't be touched by the trigger.

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. Mark Knoller (and people quoting him) should spell out how he gets there

There's rather explicit language in the agreement preventing the triggers from applying to Social Security. Now, the Joint Committee could suggest benefit cuts to Social Security, but there's no reason to believe the Dem Senate would pass those, and the trigger does not incentivize them to do so, since the cuts in the trigger are far more desirable than Social Security benefit cuts. Indeed, none of the people who hate this deal have yet explained why anybody would wall off Social Security in the trigger if they planned on cutting it on the front end. They haven't explained it because it makes absolutely no sense to do that. The fact that Social Security is walled off from cuts in the trigger means that the Joint Committee framework was built precisely to protect Social Security.

[graywarrior]

5. Thank you

[JoePhilly]

9. Correct ... here is the language ...

Consistent With Past Practice, Sequester Would Be Divided Equally Between Defense and Non-Defense Programs and Exempt Social Security, Medicaid, and Low-Income Programs: Consistent with the bipartisan precedents established in the 1980s and 1990s, the sequester would be divided equally between defense and non-defense program, and it would exempt Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement. Likewise, any cuts to Medicare would be capped and limited to the provider side.

I added the bold.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheet-victory-bipartisan-compromise-economy-american-people

[LiberalFighter]

7. The same Mark Knoller that listened in on Obama's private conversation

after he was suppose to have left the room? And complained about Nico getting a chance to ask a question at a presser?

Seems to me that Knoller is behaving more as a spoiled brat than a journalist.