President Obama: " ... We just received it, so we haven’t reviewed all the details of it. ..."

[Tx4obama]

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
July 19, 2011
Remarks by the President on the Status of Efforts to Find a Balanced Approach to Deficit Reduction
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:32 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. I wanted to give folks a quick update on the progress that we're making on the debt ceiling discussions.

I was in contact with all the leadership over the course of the weekend and continued to urge both Democrats and Republicans to come together around an approach that not only lifts the debt ceiling but also solves the underlying challenges that we face when it comes to debt and deficits.

Some progress was made in some of the discussions, some narrowing of the issues. Speaker Boehner and the Republican House caucus felt it necessary to put forward the plan that they're going to be voting on today. I think everyone's estimation is, is that that is not an approach that could pass both chambers, it's not an approach that I would sign and it's not balanced. But I understand the need for them to test that proposition.

The problem we have now is we're in the 11th hour and we don't have a lot more time left. The good news is that today a group of senators, the Gang of Six, Democrats and Republicans -- I guess now Gang of Seven, because one additional Republican senator added on -- put forward a proposal that is broadly consistent with the approach that I've urged. What it says is we've got to be serious about reducing discretionary spending both in domestic spending and defense; we've got to be serious about tackling health care spending and entitlements in a serious way; and we've got to have some additional revenue so that we have an approach in which there is shared sacrifice and everybody is giving up something.

And so, for us to see Democratic senators acknowledge that we've got to deal with our long-term debt problems that arise out of our various entitlement programs, and for Republican senators to acknowledge that revenues will have to be part of a balanced package that makes sure that nobody is disproportionately hurt from us making progress on the debt and deficits I think is a very significant step. And as I said, the framework that they put forward is broadly consistent with what we've been working on here in the White House and with the presentations that I've made to the leadership when they've come over here.

So here's where we stand. We have a Democratic President and administration that is prepared to sign a tough package that includes both spending cuts, modifications to Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare that would strengthen those systems and allow them to move forward, and would include a revenue component. We now have a bipartisan group of senators who agree with that balanced approach. And we’ve got the American people who agree with that balanced approach.

My hope, and what I will be urging Speaker Boehner, Nancy Pelosi, as well as Leader Reid and Mitch McConnell, is that they, tomorrow, are prepared to start talking turkey and actually getting down to the hard business of crafting a plan that can move this forward in time for the August 2nd deadline that we’ve set forward.

Just a couple of other points I will make. Some of you may ask, what does it mean for the plan that Senator McConnell and Senator Reid had been working on? Our attitude is, is that that continues to be a necessary approach to put forward. In the event that we don’t get an agreement, at minimum, we’ve got to raise the debt ceiling. So that’s the bare minimum that has to be achieved, but we continue to believe that we can achieve more.

And so I want to congratulate the Gang of Six for coming up with a plan that I think is balanced. We just received it, so we haven’t reviewed all the details of it. It would not match perfectly with some of the approaches that we’ve taken, but I think that we’re in the same playing field. And my hope is, is that we can start gathering everybody over the next couple of days to choose a clear direction and to get this issue resolved.
So far, at least, the markets have shown confidence that leadership here in Washington are not going to send the economy over a cliff. But if we continue to go through a lot of political posturing, if both sides continue to be dug in, if we don’t have a basic spirit of cooperation that allows us to rise above immediate election-year politics and actually solve problems, then I think markets here, the American people, and the international community are going to start reacting adversely fairly quickly.

So I think it’s very important for in these next couple of days to understand we don’t have any more time to engage in symbolic gestures; we don’t have any more time to posture. It’s time to get down to the business of actually solving this problem. And I think we now are seeing the potential for a bipartisan consensus around what that would take.

It will be hard. It will be tough. There are still going to be a lot of difficult negotiations that have to take place in order for us to actually get something done. And as I said, we have to have that failsafe that Senator McConnell and Senator Reid are working on. But the hope is, is that everybody seizes this opportunity.

All right? Okay, guys, I’m going to let Jay answer questions today. I think I’ve been pretty good to you guys. (Laughter.) But after the votes today in the House, I’ll call up Speaker Boehner and the other leadership and we’ll arrange for times where we bring folks back here, and hopefully we’ll be able to report on some additional progress over the next few days.

All right? Thank you very much, guys.

Q When will you announce whether you will be supporting the Gang of Six plan? Would that be in the next day?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I said, I think what you’re going to be seeing is an evaluation of that plan versus the things that we’ve been looking at. I think what you’re going to see is some significant overlap. But obviously just because we might agree in principle with a range of issues with six senators or seven senators, that doesn’t get us out of the House of Representatives; that doesn’t get us out of the Senate. There’s going to have to be a broader agreement on the part of all the leadership that we’re going to get this done in a serious way, and we’ve got a tight deadline to do it.

All right? Thanks, guys.

END 1:38 P.M. EDT


http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/19/remarks-president-status-efforts-find-balanced-approach-deficit-reductio

[vroomvroom]

1. Since Obama is praising it, and it clearly has Major Tax Cuts for the Rich then Ironically...

republicans will prolly not support it, not because they dont want more tax cuts for the rich but that Obama supports the entire plan which seems very, very republican.
So ironically republicans might save us all from this disaster of a plan (by not voting for it) and not the White house.

[Tx4obama]

2. Obama does NOT support the entire plan. He hasn't read it all yet.

Perhaps you should read everything that Obama actually said in the OP up above.

[AtomicKitten]

5. He praised their EFFORT but said he hadn't read it yet.

Is there something in the water around here that causes the selective reading comprehension?

[emulatorloo]

12. Selective reading comprehension and/ or willful misinterpretation

It is the craziest thing.

[ClarkUSA]

3. Funny how so many are outraged over things President Obama has never said.

Yet when you offer evidence of his ACTUAL words, none of them give a shit about the facts. Guess it interferes with their false narratives.

:kick:

[Tx4obama]

4. It seems to be the norm lately ;( n/t

[bowens43]

7. Of course

any time there is a decision to be made Obama makes the wrong one. What amazes me is that he has some many defenders here. The man has been a complete disaster. Lie after lie, broken promise after broken promise.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. Obama among other things is a skilled politician

He knows he must not avoid using the words "cut" and "Social Security", "Medicare", or "Medicaid" in the same sentance now. Doing so would just further rally opposition to his plans. "Modifications that will strengthen those systems and allow them to move forward" is vague enough to mean many things to many people, but "allowing to move forward" has always been code for reducing government costs for those programs now so that they will not become insolvent later. In double speak that is called "strengthening" those systems so that they will last longer. "Modifications" means modifying the defaults that govern when and how benefits are given out, and when those amounts are raised due to inflation.

You are right that it is impossible to prove this without relying on what you might call "circumstancial evidence". We won't have a smoking gun until after the trigger is pulled. We can meet back here later after a deal is cut to review what Obama has actually been saying with the vague terms he is not using.

[seabeckind]

6. I think I'd call bullshit on this one.

If he doesn't know exactly what's in it as well as when each part was added or modified,

he's a hell of a lot dumber than he's acting. For pete's sake there are people 2000 miles away that know the bad parts of it -- and they don't have a guy sitting in the room taking notes.

How's about this response: "I haven't been briefed on all the details and consequences but there are some parts that really concern me. We cannot continue destroying our economy by following the path we started 10 years ago."

[eomer]

8. It's already a horrible plan without knowing the details.

It calls for significant cuts in the short term. In other words, austerity cuts during a prolonged recession. Which will be a disaster for working people (or rather a further extension of the disaster we are currently in). The exact details of the austerity cuts aren't the problem, it is the basic idea of austerity cuts that is horrible.

And Obama says that the Gang of Six plan is balanced. I'm not seeing it. Where are the concessions from the other side? One would think that the main concession would be raising taxes for the wealthy. But this plan lowers the top marginal tax rate by 6 percentage points. Balanced? Seriously?

The general idea of this current plan and that Obama has been promoting more broadly is a horrible precedent. The idea that we've got to always have a balanced budget and cannot run a deficit during a recession is a horrible idea. There is no need to tie our hands behind our back by giving up the use of fiscal policy to moderate economic down cycles. And the idea of tying other issues to raising the debt ceiling is a horrible idea as well. Here we have Obama using both a fake deficit crisis and a fake solvency crisis to trick the American public into accepting austerity measures and mostly rightwing "solutions" that will further destroy the welfare and power (if any is left already) of the working classes. This is the Shock Doctrine. It is extreme rightwing framing in order to further scam and loot from the American public.

Screw the details - it's the general idea that is horrible.

[mazzarro]

9. So he cannot tell at first read if the plan met some basic requirements?

If Obama, on first read, cannot determine that the plan does not meet his basic requirements and so describe it as inadequate with the added caution that he will still wait for the full details, then Obama is either the one egging the gang-of-six corporate lackeys or Obama himself is dumb.

[BklnDem75]

10. I doubt that matters much here

Anything short of a public viewing of Obama looking at the first page, then tossing the whole thing in the trash is considered betrayal. Of course, many don't see that act alone would give repukes their victory. Even if the President thinks it's trash, he has to appear open to all suggestions. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

[emulatorloo]

13. Good analysis.