You Say You Want A Revolution...

[babylonsister]

:woohoo:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_02/017071.php


YOU SAY YOU WANT A REVOLUTION.... It's probably fair to say that there's been some concern about whether President Obama would be as "audacious" as Candidate Obama. He'd talk about bold and systemic change, but would he be limited by timidity? Would the president prefer slower, incremental change?

The answer has become overwhelmingly clear over the last few days.

We got a very good hint on Tuesday night about where this White House was headed, with an ambitious speech to Congress. But the point was driven home yesterday, with the release of the administration's budget outline, which presents a sea change in the way the federal government would operate in the future.

Looking for change you can believe in? I think we've found it.

The NYT explained that Obama's proposal is "nothing less than an attempt to end a three-decade era of economic policy dominated by the ideas of Ronald Reagan and his supporters." The budget is "a bold, even radical departure from recent history," which would "lay the groundwork for sweeping changes in health care and education," and "reverse the rapid increase in economic inequality over the last 30 years."

The LAT reported, "Not since Lyndon B. Johnson and Franklin D. Roosevelt has a president moved to expand the role of government so much on so many fronts -- and with such a demanding sense of urgency." Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said, "It changes the whole paradigm." USA Today described the budget as "unprecedented in size, breathtaking in scope and sure to have a major impact on millions of Americans."

Paul Krugman, who's been less than enthused by the president's vision of late, seems to be thrilled, saying Obama's plan "looks very, very good."

Elections have consequences. President Obama's new budget represents a huge break, not just with the policies of the past eight years, but with policy trends over the past 30 years. If he can get anything like the plan he announced on Thursday through Congress, he will set America on a fundamentally new course.

The budget will, among other things, come as a huge relief to Democrats who were starting to feel a bit of postpartisan depression. The stimulus bill that Congress passed may have been too weak and too focused on tax cuts. The administration's refusal to get tough on the banks may be deeply disappointing. But fears that Mr. Obama would sacrifice progressive priorities in his budget plans, and satisfy himself with fiddling around the edges of the tax system, have now been banished.

Robert Reich added that the budget "represents the biggest redistribution of income from the wealthy to the middle class and poor this nation has seen in more than forty years."

Once in a while, elections really do have consequences.

-Steve Benen

[TBF]

1. We'll see what it looks like when it comes out of Congress. n/t

[babylonsister]

3. Of course we will, but in the meantime I think we can celebrate the

intent. We have a president, and he has a progressive spine!

[TBF]

6. My concern is people and how they fare, not whether someone is labeled

as progressive or not. Right now the only safety net that strongly remains is Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid and I'm curious to see how he handles it. He gave a very enthusiastic speech the other night by most accounts (I read the entire thing but didn't watch it), but those words about "starting a conversation" about Social Security and "private savings account" scare me.

I love that we have our first African American president, and I will applaud what I see that is positive (the Lily Ledbetter Act is the first thing that springs to mind), but if he starts dismantling social security we are going to see more elderly freezing in their homes.

We need to keep the pressure on.

[madrchsod]

8. social security has problems that have to be addressed right now

private savings accountants is a good idea for a long term low risk investment...how`s those 401 accounts doing today?

[bdamomma]

9. and he's taking no crap either.

let those whiny repigs cry. has anyone heard the repigs give solutions other than their tax cuts which DO NOT WORK.

[cilla4progress]

22. Very very able

This administration never ceases to amaze me. I am SO RELIEVED they are making these dramatic moves this right off. NOW is when Obama has all that political capital from his resounding elective win. He still has the nation's attention - almost catching us off-guard - by moving quickly and going with the feeling of hope he engendered in the campaign. The excitement is still there, the cynicism not yet set in. I think he is so smart to be bold at this time, while we are all still enraptured. Yes, chips will fall, and some ideas will fail. But they will have been tested, providing his team with empirical data on which to move forward. And by shaking things up, he keeps us engaged. We are in very good hands, indeed.

[Odin2005]

2. The Revolution won't be televised, it is br brought to you live!

YES WE CAN!!!

[sui generis]

4. I have a serious issue with the medicare cuts.

I think that was foolish and shameful.

[babylonsister]

5. Care to elaborate on what cuts?

Last I heard, healthcare is going to be a high priority.

Obama Budget Would Create $634 Billion Health-Care Fund

President Obama intends to release a budget tomorrow that creates a 10-year, $634 billion "reserve fund" to partially pay for a vast expansion of the U.S. health care system, an overhaul that many experts project will cost as much as $1 trillion over the next decade.

Obama would pay for the expansion by trimming tax breaks for the wealthy and tightening payments to insurers, hospitals and physicians, according to a senior administration official.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/25/AR2009022502587.html?hpid=topnews

[TBF]

7. I haven't seen anything concrete on this yet - at this point I believe

most of it is speculation to be fair. Here is an Alternet article in which the topic is discussed:
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/128915/will_obama_go_after_social_security_my_editor_and_i_have_a_bet_/

Summary: Frel thinks Obama will raid SS (basically), Holland thinks not. We'll see how it turns out.

Will Obama Go After Social Security? My Editor and I Have a Bet

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted February 26, 2009.

I have a bet with my editor, Jan Frel. He thinks that President Barack Obama is going to go after Social Security. It's a huge honeypot sitting in a country that's had an enormous amount of wealth shaken out of it, and if it were looted, it might produce enough in fat management fees alone to resuscitate Wall Street's ailing financial giants.

Jan's not alone. William Greider, writing in The Nation, noted that "Governing elites in Washington and Wall Street have devised a fiendishly clever 'grand bargain' they want President Obama to embrace in the name of 'fiscal responsibility.' "

The government, they argue, having spent billions on bailing out the banks, can recover its costs by looting the Social Security system. They are also targeting Medicare and Medicaid. The pitch sounds preposterous to millions of ordinary working people anxious about their economic security and worried about their retirement years. But an impressive armada is lined up to push the idea -- Washington's leading think tanks, the prestige media, tax-exempt foundations, skillful propagandists posing as economic experts and a self-righteous billionaire spending his fortune to save the nation from the elderly.

I think Obama may offer some lofty but vague rhetoric about reforming "entitlements" as part of a broader set of policies designed to stabilize Medicare, and I believe that it's entirely possible -- and perhaps quite wise, politically -- that he'd make the very small tweaks that most progressive analysts agree will be needed, eventually, to keep a system that's fundamentally sound today healthy and fully funded in the future. (more at the link)

[babylonsister]

10. I'm aware of the discussion surrounding this, and all the

people who think it's a bad idea. I hope President Obama leaves it alone - for now. There are others who think we have to address Social Security and the future eventually. I'd prefer a Dem president do that if it has to be done.

[TBF]

12. We should also address whether giving banks an unlimited check

so they can have great bonuses and retreats is a good idea. And how about those tax benefits for the super rich under Bush?

Robbing the elderly of a basic income is heartless no matter who does it.

[babylonsister]

15. Who's robbing the elderly?

I'm not even understanding your argument.

And the bonuses and retreats are being addressed. Lots of info if you google...

http://news14.com/content/local_news/charlotte/605624/ceo-lewis-in-court-over-merrill-lynch-bonuses/Default.aspx

CEO Lewis in court over Merrill Lynch bonuses

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/27/bank.lewis.subpoena/

Bank of America subpoenaed during CEO's testimony

[TBF]

16. All I've said is that I put people in front of corporations. YMMV.

[babylonsister]

20. That's not all you said, but I see you can't defend what you said.

Got it.

[TBF]

23. Oh, be honest. I gave Obama some kudos but I'm reserving

my judgment on the budget. You just can't handle that can you? It has to be rah rah rah all the time or you're not happy.

[TBF]

25. Which point do you need more info on? I'd like to know specifically

what you think I "can't defend".

[madrchsod]

11. i think obama is going after private insurance companies

that are linked with medicare payments.

he`s not going to touch social security. if he does anything he`ll figure out how to make the system secure for the short and long term. there`s tens of millions of workers that are not paying into the system right now while people like me are just beginning to draw social security. i could have worked another 5 years but there is`t any jobs for the young people let alone someone 62.

[TBF]

14. I hope you're right, and you may be. My mom's just a little older than

you and started drawing at 62 (she's 65 now), while working part-time at McDonald's to get out of the house. Such jobs aren't so bad in little towns and she loves her friends there. I think of people like her, who have never really made any money to speak of in their lives and what their retirements will be like if we gouge social security.

And if it is a democrat doing it, even worse. I expect such repugnant actions from republicans, but democrats have the audacity to say they care about people so if they start tearing at what little safety nets we have left then we know exactly where we stand. We'll see how Obama does.

[sui generis]

13. the medicare cuts are in hospital payments

you know, things like surgical gowns, scalpels, masks, gloves and other reimbursement pieces.

I know, Obama can do no evil so I'm not convincing you :P but I didn't say it was all bad. There are just parts I disagree with. I just have a concern that the people least able to pay for their own healthcare, in the short term are being asked to tighten their belts. Chronic care is hard enough for the elderly, but acute care is usually life-or-death acute and acute care takes place in hospitals, not at home. If hospitals are "tightening their belts" because we want to wean them off the medicare tit, they will just provide fewer services to medicare patients because they won't have budget for staff to even see those patients.

In the long term, I don't like Obama's healthcare plan either: it's not bold or innovative enough but that's for a whole nother essay.

If I were king of the universe I would add universal healthcare to every paycheck deduction, just like we do social security and medicare right now.

I would underwrite medical school education to make it more affordable, with more slots and start cranking out more doctors with lower student loan obligations, and thus lower salary needs.

I WOULD regulate pharmacy pricing for government pharma contracts, and I would actively control medical costs by taking health insurance companies out of the picture for anything but elective procedures.

Our government SHOULD be in the business of preventative, emergency and basic healthcare, including dental and vision. Elective procedures, cosmetic crowns, lasik - those should all be private insurers, and existing health policies should be nationalized and consolidated to remove artificial risk pool aggregates that would be irrelevant under real basic health.

Take out the need for profit, reduce your costs, keep people from getting sick as often as possible so you won't have to spend as much to treat them IF they get sick.

How hard is that?

[babylonsister]

17. How about this?

The healthcare plan hasn't even been implemented yet, so I'll wait and see before deciding it's a disaster.

I honestly don't know how this will shake out, but it has got to be better than the current broken system. Lots of people are working towards that goal.

[TBF]

18. No one has said it's a disaster - but we're not jumping with joy either. That's all. n/t

[sui generis]

19. how about this?

I didn't say it was a disaster sister. Just said I don't like that piece of it based on what I know of healthcare. There is a difference.

Please don't lump me in with the catastrophe-monkeys, who also tend to have deeper personality flaws than just seeing catastrophe around every corner.

[babylonsister]

21. Point taken, sui. I won't be

lumping you with anyone, and you - we all - have a right to be concerned. I'm taking a wait and see attitude.

[madrchsod]

27. sounds like dennis`s healthcare plan

[bvar22]

24. I appluad the framework of this budget.

And I want to scream a big FUCK YOU to Robert Reich who is working to sabotage it.

"represents the biggest redistribution of income.."

Way to use the Republican frame and give them their talking points.
There are better and more honest ways to frame Obama's budget.

Looks like Reich doesn't like the idea of having to pay his fair share.

[babylonsister]

26. I didn't take what he said that way at all.

The rethugs are calling the president 'Robin Hood', like that's a bad thing. Take from the rich, give to the poor? I think that's where Reich was going, too.

[tomp]

28. we'll see. sounds like a lot of bluster and sycophancy to me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=103&topic_id=428915&mesg_id=428915

"Only in Washington’s bizarre politico-media culture can a shift of about a nickel on the national dollar from current uses to different ones be cast as “revolutionary.” The hype underscores the extent to which our supposedly brutal partisan debates have really taken place between the 49-yard lines on either side. In budget terms, Obama’s moving us to the 45-yard lines to meet our challenges. It’s about time. But Lenin would scoff."