(Charles Dharapak/AP)
 The
 spectacle of a supposedly liberal President repeatedly and needlessly 
trying to cut Social Security is enough to bring a reasonable, 
economically literate person to the point of existential despair. To see
 leading liberal lights like Rachel Maddow and Ezra Klein chuckle 
indulgently at those foolish Republicans in Congress over the subject – 
Don’t they know he’s already giving them what they want? – is to risk plunging into the depths of that despair.
This week the President hosted a dinner for Republicans leaders where
 he worked to sell his budget proposal, including his harmful plan to 
cut benefits through the “chained CPI.” National Security was the main 
course and Social Security was the dessert.  And guess who 
wasn’t
 coming to dinner: The elderly, the disabled, or any policy experts who 
understand the disastrous implications of the chained CPI.
The Maddow/Klein exchange (which we’ll bring to you as soon as a 
transcript is available) is the crest of a building wave in 
pro-Democratic Party commentary which says, as 
Klein
 puts it, that “what we have here is a failure to communicate.” Klein 
says that at least “some of the gridlock (in Washington) is due to poor 
information.” Jonathan Chait 
bemoans the fact that Republicans ”won’t acknowledge (Obama’s)actual offer, which includes large cuts to retirement programs.“
Silly, silly Republicans. Klein quotes one reporter as saying of the 
White House, “They tell us three times a day that they want to do 
chained CPI!”
That’s right: The White House has been trying to impose this benefit 
cut on Social Security’s elderly and disabled recipients for years, 
and Republicans don’t even know. 
 Neither do most Democrats, for that matter. They think they voted for a
 President who will defend those benefits, not work relentlessly to cut 
them.
But Democrats like Maddow, Klein, and Chait know better. They know 
exactly what Obama’s been trying to do.  And their only complaint seems 
to be that 
he’s not doing effectively enough. We’re not hearing 
much from the ‘left’ side of the debate about the profound flaws, 
biases, and inherent cynicism behind both the President’s policy and his
 rhetoric.
Here are the facts:
- Research suggests that Social Security cost-of-living increases are 
already inadequate. (See studies on “CPI-E” for more details on the best
 ways to increase them.)
 
- Obama’s proposed chained-CPI cut would typically reduce benefits for 3 percent, and by as much as 6 percent for some recipients.
 
- The White House’s decision to label this cut the “superlative CPI” 
is grotesque. It suggests that elderly women who receive an average of 
$950 or so per month are receiving “superlative” benefit increases each 
year.
 
- The Administration’s insistence on speaking of “entitlement reform,”
 mixing Medicare (which has a real cost problem because of our 
for-profit health system) with Social Security, is a cheap trick first 
devised by Republican consultants.
 
Progressive commentators – or neutral but well-informed observers – 
should be emphasizing these points. Instead we’re hearing that the 
President’s opponents are foolish for not knowing the President agrees 
with them! Each of MSNBC’s major personalities has developed his or her 
own personal brand of eye-rolling at Republicans. In this case we’re 
told that Republicans are stupid for not knowing the details of Obama’s 
budget proposal – especially his planned cuts to Social Security and 
Medicare.
Stupid? Stupid like a fox – or, if you prefer, like a Fox News 
Network.  By feigning ignorance of the President’s plan, they’re forcing
 the White House to repeat it over and over: We 
want to cut Social Security, guys! We 
want to cut Medicare!
“They tell us three times a day …”
Surprisingly, both Maddow and Klein buy into the implausible premise 
that Senate Republicans, each of whom have large staffs and access to 
Republican Party employees, literally don’t know that Obama has offered 
to cut Social Security as part of a Grand Bargain.  As a result of their
 feigned ignorance, the White House is now reiterating that offer, 
repeatedly and publicly.
“Obama renews budget offer to cut social safety nets,” says a typical story on this subject from 
Reuters.
This is shaping up to be quite a victory for the GOP. Unless 
something changes, they’re about to see a core Democratic program cut – 
and the Democrats will take the heat for it! The only thing that can 
stop that outcome is concerted public pressure from the Democratic base.
That’s what makes the Maddow/Klein school of partisanship so tragic 
in this instance: By reducing this disastrous idea – the product of all 
the “buy-partisan” cash being spread among leader of both parties – 
they’re defusing political blowback from the party’s base. Public 
pressure from Democratic voters could stop this headlong rush into a 
decision that will harm America’s seniors and disabled – and save their 
party from a potential political catastrophe.
Maddow, Klein and others know – or should know – that Social Security
 doesn’t contribute to the deficit. They know – or should know – how 
politically damaging this move would be. They know – or should know – 
how much it would harm seniors. They should be demanding that the 
President defend the program, while forcing his opponents to attack it.
Instead they’re applauding him for doing the dirty work himself, and 
criticizing his shrewd opponents for their lack of public gratitude.
How short can a Democrat’s memory be? The Republicans regained the 
House in 2010 by forcing Obama to make these offers, albeit far less 
publicly than he’s doing now. Then they ran to his 
left with a 
fraudulent “Seniors’ Bill of Rights,” after ensuring that the Democrats’
 polling on this issue plunged by a startling 25 points. (At the time 
Obama 
was less trusted than 
George Bush on Social Security, despite Bush’s attempt to dismantle and privatize the program).
Now the Republicans are outplaying the President once again. They’re 
exposing his agenda on Social Security, an agenda which became evident 
when he appointed anti-Social Security pitchmen Alan Simpson and Erskine
 Bowles to lead a ‘deficit commission’ shortly after his election. Now, 
in a form of media-related collateral damage, this strategy may also 
wound the credibility of commentators like Maddow and Klein.
Jonathan Chait 
asks, “Would teaching Republicans about Obama help?” Not nearly as much as teachers voters about Obama’s proposal would 
hurt. The
 President’s Social Security proposals are deeply misguided, both as 
policy and as politics, and this flattering commentary is deeply 
damaging.
As part of their long game, Sen. Lamar Alexander and the GOP issued 
a press release entitled “If the History Books Were Written Today, We Would Remember President Obama for the Sequester.”
They know that’s not true. Of 
course the President won’t be 
remembered for the sequester. If things don’t change, we’ll remember 
President Obama for cutting Social Security – and his party will pay the
 price.  Disabled and elderly Americans will pay an even higher price. 
And the Republicans will be laughing all the ways to the polls in 2014.
                   
© 2013 Campaign for America's Future
 
    Richard (RJ) Eskow is a well-known blogger and writer, a former 
Wall Street executive, an experienced consultant, and a former musician.
 He has experience in health insurance and economics, occupational 
health, benefits, risk management, finance, and information technology. 
Richard has consulting experience in the US and over 20 countries.
   
 
No comments:
Post a Comment