Skip to main content

View Diary: Boehner Plan B does not include chained CPI? Take it off the table (143 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It was in Obama's offer (19+ / 0-)

    I don't understand why, like Nancy Pelosi, some folks keep denying what the WH acknowledged.  

    •  The White House Spokesperson on CPI, from the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pistolSO, La Gitane

      White House Press briefing on Dec. 18, 2012.

      MR. CARNEY:  Well, let’s be clear about one thing:  The President didn’t put it on the table.  This is something that Republicans want.  And it is --

      Q    But the Republicans --

      MR. CARNEY:  -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it.  And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process.  I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations.  And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI.  

      There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/...

      Bold highlights by commentor.

      This CPI issue was a Republican request.

      The Republicans are now against it because, I believe, they find it unatttractive that the changed CPI could boost taxes..... They are after all anti tax increase. And with some of Boehner's rabid tea party members, this is a no go....

      Perhaps this is the reason the President offered this as a counter measure....he knew they would reject it.... This to some Republicans is a poision pill..... And the President has just shoved it at Republicans, while appearing to offer concessions..... I think it's brilliant.....

      •  Let me see if I have the dimensions straight: (18+ / 0-)

        1. GOP demands chained CPI from White House according to White House.

        2. White House accepts demand.

        3. White House offers chained CPI to GOP knowing GOP would decline to accept what they just demanded.

        4. Brilliant!

        Do I have this correct?

        •  A poison pill...for something that you just told (5+ / 0-)

          us the other side wanted?

          So the WH house inserted something to kill a bill that they explicitly said the other side demanded...

          yup...sounds about right for this negotiation team...and the people that try to spin their ineptitude...

          "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

          by justmy2 on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:41:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  He poisoned the bill by including something you (3+ / 0-)

          claim the Republicans were demanding?

          "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

          by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:15:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You're confused. Think about it. n/t (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Matt Z
        •  IF your premise that the GOP didn't (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kj in missouri, allenjo

          really want the chained CPI provision on Social Security (and that's a big if), then Boehner has successfully embarrassed the President by convincing him to go out on that limb.

          The beauty of the secret squirrel, behind-closed-doors meetings for the Republicans is that they can privately make demands and then deny that they did so - which is why many people watching - well, some smart people watching - thought that it wasn't a very good idea for the President to agree to those meetings.

          Anyway, aside from being more than extremely annoyed and disappointed with the President for ever including the chained CPI offer in any deal, now you are telling me that I should consider the possibility that he is in effect also a sucker, on top of it all.

          Not sure you're doing the President or the White House any good with your argument.  You're not helping, as they say...

          Just sayin'

        •  POTUS took "chained CPI for SS" & made it omnibus (0+ / 0-)

          I think Ned is accurately understanding what the Whitehouse was saying.  Reading the transcript it looks like the POTUS said "OK, you want Chained CPI for SS? I will do it but only in the form of I give you Chained CPI for EVERYTHING."  Hence the poison pill.  It is kind of a subtle F*ck You.  One of those wonky positions that is hard to explain to the general public in a sound bite but has big implications.  Was playing with fire though since the soundbite is what the public took from it, e.g., it is just about Chained CPI for SS.  The risk was that the repubes could have passed a clean bill and asked why the POTUS was lying.  Didn't happen though.  Was just to damn muddy.  Media isn't sophisticated enough to explain it.  Even we are fighting w/ one another trying to decipher it.  If no one here but Ned was able to even identify WTF the Whitehouse was TRYING to say, lord help us all if that was actually supposed to be a political winner from BHO.

          Mmmmm. Sprinkles. - H.J. Simpson.

          by ten canvassers on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 04:51:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  First of all...not in the president's offere (8+ / 0-)

        and the republicans asked for it are not the same.

        2.   The President had this in his offer last summer, so Carney is being misleading at best.

        3.  Who care who put it on the table first?  What is this?  Kindergarten?

        "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

        by justmy2 on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:40:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Of course, you don't care. You are contented to (0+ / 0-)

          suggest that the President somehow pulled this offer out just because we know Obama is so dastardly.... This whole diary is about the President making the offer. What are you talking about with "Who cares"?

          What we have here is a series of negotiations within a dynamic. The full scope of which none of us here and certainly none of the eternal anti-Obama critics have any knowledge of..... So, by all means, let's accuse Carney of lying. It is much more conducive to the anti-White House rhetoric.

          •  i'm not an eternal anti-Obama critic (6+ / 0-)

            by the slightest measure, and i don't think it matters one whit who put cuts to SS on the table.  a ten cent SS cut shouldn't be on anyone's table.   i suggest a dynamically robust negotiation without social security mentioned even in passing.

            i quoted st ronnie above, now i'll quote idiot mitt:  it's the principle here.  democrats don't touch the third rail.

            "From single strands of light we build our webs." ~kj

            by kj in missouri on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:56:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  democrats don't touch the third rail. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kj in missouri, quill

              There is little to be left of the democratic party once they start dismantling the programs they built and defended over the past decades.

              "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

              by allenjo on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:35:02 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  But, but, but... (0+ / 0-)

          He made me do it!!!

      •  speaking only for myself, (11+ / 0-)

        it doesn't matter who put it on the table.  the idea that PBO would either put it or let it stay on the table enough to get my irish up, to quote St. Ronnie.

        "From single strands of light we build our webs." ~kj

        by kj in missouri on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:40:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Can you link the Republican public proposal (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        thegood thebad thedumb, allenjo

        pushed by the orange one which called for chained CPI?

        "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

        by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:13:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Poor Mr. Carney, he just doesn't know what is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kj in missouri

        going on, and they send him out, he jumbles up a bunch of words that make little and sometimes no sense,  and they call it a presser.

        MR. CARNEY:  -- part of his -- if I could please answer Sam’s question, I’d appreciate it.  And the President did include it in his counterproposal, his counteroffer, as part of this process, as part of the negotiation process.  

        I would note that this is a technical change -- would be if instated -- to the way that economists calculate inflation, and it would affect every program that has -- that uses the CPI in its calculations.  

        And so it’s not directed at one particular program; it would affect every program that uses CPI.  

        There are also -- as part of the President’s proposals, he would make sure that the most vulnerable were exempted out from this change.

        And for exempting the most vulnerable that would have to require means testing..........

        "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

        by allenjo on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:26:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Social security has always been means tested. (0+ / 0-)
          •  You are going to have to tell me how??????? (0+ / 0-)

            "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

            by allenjo on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 03:56:07 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Basically, SS benefit is 90% of average salary (0+ / 0-)

              up to certain cutoff then 32% of salary between first and second cutoffs and 15% of salary after the second cutoff. So if your average salary was low enough, you'll get 90% of it as a SS benefit. If it was higher, you will get much less. And the SS tax you pay is fixed as a % of income so people with lower income get a lot more in benefits than they paid in taxes. That's means testing. I don't have a problem with it but we shouldn't pretend that it doesn't exist.

              •  I have very wealthy friends that get very high (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FG

                social security payments. They did not have to qualify for that amount, they received what is calculated as to what they paid in over the years.

                I also have some other friends very well off that collect ss disability payments, so I doubt there is any means testing there as they would never qualify.

                I am aware that for welfare, food stamps and programs like that you do have to pass a means tests to qualify. I have a neighbor on gets food stamps and Medicaid help and she had to qualify by income, bank statements, her expenses, etc. just like qualifying for a loan to show her need.

                Perhaps we are looking at it from different sides, mine being that what you collect (the amount) does not require you to prove you need, nor is it reduced for other income that you have.

                As Pelosi was saying - protecting the poor/needy from cuts in using a chained cpi, the only way that could be done would be a means test, that they would qualify for that protection from cuts that others collecting SS would not.

                Are we on the same page here?

                "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

                by allenjo on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 06:52:54 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  You mean that people don't qualify for certain (0+ / 0-)

                  benefits if their income exceeds certain threshold. That's true for many programs although not for social security as you're saying.

                  But it is not necessary to change SS in such a way to protect low income seniors. Since the formula for calculation of SS benefits is already quite complex, there are plenty of ways it can be modified to preserve the income of lower income recipients.

    •  it was not a wish list, it included what the GOP (0+ / 0-)

      GOP wanted, the chained social security, and what the Dems wanted, a tax cut for the middle class

      Brand new favorite RSS feed of Daily Kos Radio Podcasts http://kagrox.libsyn.com/rss
      Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

      by We Won on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:47:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The middle class doesn't need tax cuts. They're (3+ / 0-)

        massively undertaxed compared to just about every developed nation on Earth.

        The Middle Class needs services.  The Middle Class need to get something in return for their taxes.

        "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

        by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:17:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  some countries provide more benefits with less (0+ / 0-)

          money

          Brand new favorite RSS feed of Daily Kos Radio Podcasts http://kagrox.libsyn.com/rss
          Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

          by We Won on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:39:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We pay staggeringly low taxes. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            quill

            While I have many issues with Clinton, his tax policies were in fact superior to George Bush's.

            We don't need Bush rates with minor tweaks.

            You don't jump start a stalled economy (and the real economy has been stalled for 5 years) with tax breaks.

            You do it with spending.

            "Furthermore, if you think this would be the very very last cut ever if we let it happen, you are a very confused little rabbit." cai

            by JesseCW on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 02:52:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  To the equivalent of five people... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kj in missouri

            Some countries also don't provide much benefit at all for their citizens because they have not invested in resources and infrastructure to serve their people.

            Anyway, whatever.

            If you are talking about Social Security that is an earned benefit that the government really has no logical or legal reason to downgrade because of deficit issues.  It is a completely separate fund.

            It would be like the US Federal Government deciding that they are going to reduce LLoyds of London's payouts for legitimate claims made by their insured customers in order to balance the US government's budget.

            It would be like me deciding that you - who I do not know from Adam - must take a pay cut so that I can buy a bigger car - even though the savings yielded on your pay cut won't actually pay for my bigger car.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (126)
  • Community (53)
  • Republicans (35)
  • Environment (33)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Culture (30)
  • Memorial Day (30)
  • Bernie Sanders (26)
  • Elections (26)
  • Media (24)
  • Spam (21)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • GOP (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • Economy (17)
  • Law (17)
  • Barack Obama (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site