Skip to main content

President Barack Obama meets with bipartisan House and Senate Leadership in the Cabinet Room of the White House to discuss his upcoming fiscal policy speech, April 13, 2011. Seated with the President from left are: Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Sen. Mitch McC
Peter Orszag probably thought he was doing his old boss, President Obama, a favor when he penned this op-ed for Bloomberg, arguing that the chained CPI really, maybe, probably won't be that big of a benefit cut, and that "the difference between the chained CPI and the standard CPI has been diminishing. That means the impact of switching indexes may not be as great as many assume." That's an attempt to mollify Democrats and the 70 percent of voters over age 50 who absolutely loathe the idea.

Of course that leads to the obvious question: then why bother? Why not work with the so-far experimental index for seniors, the CPI-E, if a new index is in order. That answer is easy. Because chained CPI is a cut, and the administration wants to offer up this sacrifice of the elderly as a warped expression of "good faith." Good faith to the Republicans, not to the rest of us. But what Orszag is also saying, as TMP's Brian Beutler points out, is that switching to the chained CPI isn't going to do all that for deficit reduction.

Republicans have already dismissed the offer as not going far enough, as small ball that if the president really wanted he'd have done already. Since even President Obama's former OMB director (you can hear them say now, gleefully) says that it won't really do much for the deficit, then Social Security must be cut more. If, you know, he really means it.

But it wasn't entirely Republicans Obama was reaching out to, Beutler says, and that part of his goal "was to win the battle for elite opinion by positioning himself between those on his left criticizing him for preemptively conceding (and, worse, putting Social Security on the chopping block) and the entire GOP, which evidently can’t take yes for an answer." If so, mission not accomplished. Elite opinion is essentially Republican opinion. If Republicans will use Orszag's argument as ammunition against Obama, the elites—the Very Serious People—will use it as proof that much, much more needs to be done to hurt the elderly if the deficit beast is to be tamed. Even though Social Security does not contribute to the deficit. That doesn't matter. What matters is Obama's willingness to make people actually hurt. So even just as an effort triangulation to prove that he is really willing to piss off his base, it is likely to fail.

The Very Serious People are the only constituency Obama has in making this offer. Republicans have already, repeatedly, rejected it. He put his fellow Democrats in a terrible, terrible position in making it. The public certainly is massively opposed to it. And now Peter Orszag has ruined his chances of getting the VSPs on his side.

The good news is that this budget is almost certainly DoA. The bad news is that the Rubicon has been crossed. A Democratic president, who still has three years in office to try to prove himself to the VSPs, has sacrificed Social Security benefit cuts, and set himself up to be pushed into offering up much, much more.

That's why we have to keep fighting it. Send an email to the White House telling President Obama to give up the chained CPI cuts to Social Security and veterans.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Tue Apr 09, 2013 at 09:55 AM PDT.

Also republished by Pushing back at the Grand Bargain and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site