Boehner Now Says Debt Ceiling is Obama’s Problem
WASHINGTON – Feeling hoodwinked?
Bamboozled?
Sen. Bernie Sanders was furious on the Stengthen Social Security conference call on Friday. When asked about conversations with the White House, Sanders said they’d been “less than effective” in reaching out. He also called out Obama for reneging on a campaign promise. Sen. Whitehouse went further, not only using the word “capitulating” when speaking of Pres. Obama’s dealing with Republicans, but also stated that it was thought Social Security and entitlements were “off the table,” then Pres. Obama “opens the door for the GOP,” clearly unhappy with the subterfuge. Both senators leading the fight against COLA cuts and other manipulations in Obama’s “balanced approach” strategy.
“Elections matter. What candidates say when they’re running for president matters. … The president made a promise to the American people and he should keep that promise.” – Sen. Bernie Sanders (on conference call, 7.8.11)
Now everyone knows he cannot be trusted with the legacy that makes Democrats Democrats.
As I wrote this week, it isn’t over until the Tea Party squeals and, predictably, they did and Speaker Boehner got an earful. Now he’s giving his own back:
“This debt limit increase is [Obama's] problem,” he said.
Boehner is trying to force a deficit reduction package entirely based on spending cuts, saying Obama’s demands for new revenues would only be considered if Obama accepted deep cuts to entitlements.
Meanwhile Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) offered his strongest criticism yet of President Barack Obama’s leadership in the ongoing talks.
“I have little question that as long as this President is in the Oval Office, a real solution is unattainable,” he said on the Senate floor Tuesday. Adding, “This was not an easy decision for me.”
The Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America, as is the Democratic Party, though at least Democrats have a soul hidden away in the bottom tier where alternative energy and the “Welfare for All” crowd hang out, so the notion the establishment political class would cause a complete implosion of the financial market is absurd. Even Sen. Jim DeMint said on Fox News Sunday there was no way there would be a default, sending a very strong message to Tea Party members, though we’ll have to see if Mrs. Bachmann gets the message. Right now she’s hedging for a balanced budget amendment, which illustrates just how daft the Tea Party caucus is.
Defaulting on the debt ceiling is never going to happen. Now Democrats are left hoping no deal is done, beyond raising the debt ceiling, considering what Pres. Obama has served up.
If Democrats don’t find their inner Tea Party gene, by the time Pres. Obama’s through negotiating away the foundation of the party, including in messaging, there won’t be anything left that anyone cares about voting for in 2012. Many are already there.
Chuck Todd made a very important point on “Meet the Press” this past Sunday:
MR. TODD: … And you know, I’ve been fascinated by the economic talking points from the administration. When you have the president out there saying, you know, it may be better for people to rent rather than own–he has said that a few times. … And the Treasury secretary to say, “Boy, it’s going to take a while for people to feel the recovery,” it’s almost–I guess, they’re trying to say, “Hey, look, we’re, we’re trying to be straight with you, this is what the environment’s going to look like for a while.” And it is clear that’s what they’re preparing–the environment they’re preparing to run in, which is going to be a tough one.
This message won’t work for 2012.
But after seeing Pres. Obama’s brand of Democratic “leadership,” I’m not sure anyone but die hard loyalists will sweat whether he gets reelected or not.
Taylor Marsh is a Washington based political analyst, veteran writer and commentator on national politics, foreign policy, and women in power. A veteran national politics writer, Taylor’s been writing on the web since 1996. She has reported from the White House, been profiled in the Washington Post, The New Republic, and has been seen on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, CNN, MSNBC, Al Jazeera English and Al Jazeera Arabic, as well as on radio across the dial and on satellite, including the BBC. Marsh lives in the Washington, D.C. area. This column is cross posted from her blog.
24 Responses to “Boehner Now Says Debt Ceiling is Obama’s Problem”
Taylor – This is plain sour grapes and you know it. I don’t like the compromises Obama is prepared to make BUT like it or not this is the state of the union at the present time.
Call it a strategic retreat or whatever but it is what is necessary in this environment. Like the Eric Cantors of the world Democrats can stand firm on their principles until they either win, or more likely, lose the political war. Obama losing in 2012 would be catastrophic to Democratic ideals. Want to see Social Security privatized? Want to see Medicare vouchered? Medicaid shrunk to the size of a bathtub? HCR revoked? Corporate taxes shrunk to peanuts while the middle class pays thru the nose? Fine – sit on your fanny and let Obama lose and the Republican winner’s shirt tails carry them to hold both houses of Congress.
It is always amusing how partisans on both sides see any possibility of the other side winning as not only a suboptimal outcome, but a TOTAL CATASTROPHE!!!!!
It is not as amusing to see the effects of such hyperbole on the prospects for civilized debate about actual policy alternatives, but whatever. It’s just the Internet.
jdledell says:
July 12, 2011 at 2:26 pm
Putting entitlements on the table is absolutely not necessary to raise the debt ceiling.
Obama losing in 2012 would be catastrophic to Democratic ideals.
Considering Pres. Obama is willing to put “Democratic ideals” on the table, there is absolutely no evidence that your statement above is true.
You’re also making unhinged judgments under the delusion of partisanship, something from which I’ve freed myself. I’m a liberal with loyalties to policy prescriptions, not fleeting flim flam politicians who are willing to sell out FDR ideals.
At present, there is very little difference between either political party, though when factoring in the Tea Party there’s no doubt that the reasoning and governance ability plummets significantly.
I do find it interesting that like so many Obama loyalists you choose to blame others for what is actually Pres. Obama’s fault.
Cheer up. As I’ve written innumerable times, Pres. Obama is still the best bet to win in ’12. I’m just hearing from a hell of a lot of people that they won’t lift a finger or raise a penny to help him do it.
So, Taylor, is your position that no reductions in Social Security or Medicare benefits are tolerable?
If so, how do you propose to cover the cost?
“The Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America, as is the Democratic Party, though at least Democrats have a soul hidden away in the bottom tier”
Therein seems to lie the difference. The GOP doesn’t want to be seen as cooperating toward a solution (of course they don’t put it in those terms) and they depend on the combination of tribal loyaties (which we see in profusion even here) and a voting public that never seems to really grasp what is going on. If Obama knows where the line is and holds it, then he may retain progressives, if he doesn’t then it will be an old case of the electorate being held hostage by low expectations. Do we get the govt we deserve? Some of us do and some of us don’t.
Why is the GOP so obsessive about no new revenue generation? Until they change their stance on that I don’t see why anyone should take them seriously.
I suspect if Obummer is not given the chance to ” go big”, he will simply go 14th Amendment and all of this jawboning in the interim will prove to be one great waste of bandwidth.
However, after becoming an ardent reader of Hullabaloo and FDL, I believe it is apt to assign the label “villagers” to TMVs left leaners.
zephyr says:
July 12, 2011 at 3:09 pm
The answer lies in the Tea Party caucus & their basic ignorance of government’s importance, especially to the those who have the least among us.
They’ve taken the “boot strap” mentality of the Republican party, made famous through wingnut radio’s efforts to get people to vote against their own interests in behalf of the wealthy, & cauterized it.
Or perhaps some of them are just skeptical of the government’s ability to fight poverty without breeding a lot of corruption and dependence.
But no, I’m sure you’re right. The only POSSIBLE explanation is bad motives.
I respectfully disagree with you Taylor on President Obama’s bamboozling us. What I think President Obama, Senator Boehner, and other “players” are doing is flailing away. Their corporate interests are conflicting with the reality on the ground so everyone posturing for “cool points” with the voters FIRST and solving the problem SECOND. I think the most truth we’ve heard on this issue has come from Chuck Todd’s words about what Obama and Geithner said. The message may not work in 2012 but it is the truth: we’re in deep doo-doo.
A Republican may be able to win the Presidency by capitalizing on the non-working message. Even if this debt ceiling issue gets resolved (and it will), I still don’t see the job creating engine revving up and rolling around. There are mountains of consumer debt out there that is building due to lost jobs, not enough jobs, and not enough income when working.
Personally, I don’t give a rat’s arse who comes up with solutions to resolve the job creation stall which is issue #1. But right now, all I see and hear is verbal bullcrappery from the corners.
Furthermore our ENTIRE economic mess is an American family affair. Conservatives, liberals, middle-roaders, crazies, wackaroons, etc all contributed freely to the cheap credit extravaganza and other goodies. The mere mention of laying this on one person’s or political group’s lap is asinine. President Obama mentioned “we have to eat our peas”. No one in the Executive or Legislative branch has any intention of eating their peas. We, on the other hand, are being force-fed and injected with “peas” daily. Whether we like it or not.
So I don’t care I how they work out the debt ceiling mess. Work it out. Capitulation, faux or real big tenting, dancing, BBQ contests, Golfgates, whatever. Get ‘er done and stop playing with us. This movie is bad.
T-STEEL, Site Administrator says:
July 12, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Just to be clear, I was not “bamboozled” or “hoodwinked” by Pres. Obama, who has done exactly what I said he’d do when I started covering him in early 2007. But many people are feeling this way now that he’s served up entitlements in an ode to seduce independents for ’12.
As for “peas,” Pres. Obama isn’t going to eat his peas either. His lackluster withdrawal plan from Afghanistan proves it. His inability to take private insurance companies out of health care proved it. Offering Big Pharma part of ACA proved it. Libya proves it. Buying into GOP economics in December proved it.
The austerity kick that Obama has bought into hook, line & sinker feeds on itself. There are infrastructure jobs that could be created throughout this country that actually would support other industries, starting a contagion. Instead, the DEMOCRATIC President of the United States adopted austerity.
It’s a loser in a recession and we’re living the proof.
“Or perhaps some of them are just skeptical of the government’s ability to fight poverty without breeding a lot of corruption and dependence.”
And when the other alternative is “trickle down” and reducing welfare until morale improves? Perhaps there is cause to be skeptical of a party that is now making demands that even Reagan failed to meet? Perhaps there is cause to be skeptical of the idea that more tax cuts and gutted unions will bring back jobs, make livable wages and thus reduce poverty?
Government is not the only institution with a spotty past and present. It is not the only element in society that has been given a chance and found wanting.
Taylor – I’m a bit surprised at your answer. If you were President how would you handle this situation? Do you hold the line all the way to August 3rd and hope the public blames the republicans for the default? Or do you hold the line thinking the republicans will blink first? Or do you offer minor cuts and hope it’s enough to swing the republicans to a deal to avoid default? $500b, 1000b? How big are you willing to cut, if any, and what programs take the biggest bite?
The President is certainly powerful but he cannot simply snap his fingers and solve this fiscal problem in a deeply divided society. I’m also surprised you think there will be no dramatic changes to your beloved policies if Obama loses. HCR would certainly go, in my opinion. I think there is no question Medicaid would be severely cut – there is no voting block supporting it. Perhaps I was too pessimistic about SS and Medicare because it still is a third rail but both programs will be dented.
Sanders is one of the more idiotic far-lefties who is mindless when it comes to entitlements and treating them, no matter how unrealistic or failed in design, as sacred.
Taylor Swift, explain how you would pay for Social Security and Medicare if you don’t like raising FICA taxes to 25 per cent.
[Z]ephyr asked:
CORRECTION: Why does the GOP resist no new taxes?
Perhaps they resist too much, but the problem is spending, after all.
[...] / Politics: Boehner Says The Debt Limit Increase Is Obama’s Problem Discussion: msnbc.com, The Moderate Voice, Little Green Footballs, Sky Dancing and Daily [...]
LOGAN PENZA says:
July 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Social Security is solvent for 25 years. I’d raise the cap to $200,000. Problem solved, though Bob Reich has suggested the gov. pay SS what it owes it.
We can’t solve Medicare without further health care reform. ACA didn’t come close to doing that, according to health care experts beyond the Dem Party.
Medicaid is the one that’s tough, which is why Obama’s scheme to raise Medicare eligibility was nuts.
jdledell says:
July 12, 2011 at 5:23 pm
This was about raising the debt ceiling. Pres. Obama tied it to entitlements, hoping to squeeze Democrats, which was a huge mistake, as he found out today.
Again, I’ve never written that Obama will lose in ’12, though I think he’s vulnerable. He’s still the favorite to win, though it won’t be like ’08.
I simply no longer buy into the lesser evil option, which I believe props up the current status quo.
[...] Boehner Now Says Debt Ceiling is Obama’s Problem (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
Taylor, I do not understand how increasing the number of people enrolled on the government system under the rubric of “health care reform” helps solve the problem. It would seem to make it worse. Or are you assuming that the budgetary trick of assuming savings by cutbacks in Medicare payment rates is actually going to come to pass? And if it did, how are you dealing with the fact that many doctors refuse to treat Medicare patients NOW (because they can’t even cover their costs) let alone after their payments were cut by 35%?
Also think your statement of Social Security finances is wildly optimistic and reliant on assumptions that were only put in place to get a politically useful projection from the CBO and do not in fact reflect any future that any sane economist would stand behind.
Taylor, your reply hasn’t come very swiftly. How would you pay for the entitlements rather than raise FICA taxes to 25 per cent? (That is what it would take to make the entitlements truly solvent, to pay for them entirely.) No, making them “mandatory” and all paid from the general funds (as much of Medicare already is) without specifying the tax increases does not constitute a valid response.
It’s a fact that Medicare patients are refused service now. (Their only consolation is relative and theoretical — Medicaid patients get even more refusals.) What do you think would happen if providers got even less money?
(I’ve invited people to think, probably without acceptances, about the future if Medicare is the sole “payer” and there is no “private option” — how much better or worse would be than predicted?)
Incidentally, do you have faith in the entitlements to the extent that you actually support the dumbing down and the sanitizing of the annual Trustees’ reports that has happened since Obama took office, that the most important bad news has been removed and the latest Trustees’ report assumes a 30 per cent reduction in payments to providers when assessing the financial state of Medicare present and future, even though they admit that the reduction is unrealistic? (They also presume economic growth.)
Absolutely!
[...] Boehner Now Says Debt Ceiling is Obama’s Problem (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
I just want to say that the Democrats and the Republicans both need to get there stuff together.We are all sick of hearing about you two. Would love to see both parties do something for the people.I would like to know what the Democrats and the Republicans giving up and how many of them are losing there homes? Are they losing there medicare or living on less then a thousand dollars a month? NO!! So for once do something for us the real people.Try to help us!!!
Why don’t you think about us the USA!!!