Robert Reich: Why Obama Isn’t Fighting the Budget Battle

[highplainsdem]

http://robertreich.org/post/3780342395

Why Obama Isn’t Fighting the Budget Battle

Friday, March 11, 2011


In the next week the action moves from Wisconsin to Washington, where the deadline looms for a possible government shutdown over the federal budget. President Obama has to take a more direct and personal role in that budget battle – both for the economy’s sake and for the sake of his reelection. But will he? Don’t count on it.

Worried congressional Democrats say the President needs to use his bully pulpit to counter defections in Democatic ranks, such as the ten Democrats and one allied Independent who on Wednesday voted against a Senate leadership plan to cut $6.2 billion from the federal budget over the rest of fiscal year 2011. They want Obama to grab the initiative and push a plan to eliminate tax breaks for oil companies and for companies that move manufacturing facilities out of the country, and a proposal for a surtax on millionaires.

-snip-

Shortly after the Democrats’ “shellacking” last November, I phoned a friend in the White House who had served in the Clinton administration. “It’s 1994 all over again,” he said. “Now we move to the center.”

-snip-

From this, many in the Obama White House have concluded that the president should follow Clinton’s campaign script — distancing himself from congressional Democrats, embracing further deficit reduction, and seeking guidance from big business. If it worked for Clinton, it must work for Obama — or so it’s supposed.

-snip-

Another great column from Reich, who points out exactly what's wrong with this "superficial logic" given the vastly different economic crisis we face now (and Reich points out, too, that the economic recovery in the mid-1990s, not the move to the right, is what got Bill Clinton re-elected).

Obama needs to fight the Republican plans for budget cuts. But Reich says that "Obama won’t actively fight the budget battle if the current White House view of how he wins in 2012 continues to prevail."

[Lorien]

1. "Now we move to the center"???????!!!

The center of WHAT?? Obama is to the Right of Reagan on just about every issue. If he moves further Right he'll fall off the cliff of insanity with the teabaggers and their ilk.

[dflprincess]

2. So true

my first thought was that if Obama is moving to the center he'll have move left.

[Scuba]

9. That's a euphemism for "further right" .....

... as Canned Heat sang 40+ years ago: "Dick's on the throne again, leaning so far right he might fall in"

[mmonk]

10. Hell.

[progressoid]

3. I think he overshot the center.

[highplainsdem]

14. +1

[bobbolink]

24. He began at "overshoot"

[ProfessionalLeftist]

4. He never fought any other battle either. What's new? n/t

[ProfessionalLeftist]

5. if he keeps trying so desperately hard to 'win in 2012', he's going to lose. n/t

He's lost my vote, for sure. I'll never vote Republican but I will write in Bernie Sanders or Kucinich.

[roguevalley]

6. nice to know that the well being of 300 million people fall somewhere

after re-elect me and fuck you.

[chill_wind]

7. That about sums it up. n/t

[sendero]

13. +1..

... yeah, that's about it.

[nashville_brook]

27. ouch! +1

[upi402]

8. Wouldn't it be great if he was just doing damage control for 4 years

so he could do some real good in his lame-duck second term?

I can dream...

[bullwinkle428]

19. That's about the only bit of "hope" I'm left to cling to at this point.

[xchrom]

11. Recommend

[jannyk]

12. “Now we move to the center.” - so he's coming back from the 'right'?

k&r

[Poboy]

15. The insanity and weakness of the R's is this liars only hope.

What a massive failure this liar is.

[chill_wind]

16. Paul Krugman says it too. Aiding and abetting as an election strategy.

Plenty of valid discussion about the disgusting R's in the intro paragraphs, but he gets to this same conclusion:

Of course, Republicans aren’t the only cynics. As the national debate over fiscal policy descends ever deeper into penny-pinching, future-killing absurdity, one voice is curiously muted — that of President Obama.

The president and his aides know that the G.O.P. approach to the budget is wrongheaded and destructive. But they’ve stopped making the case for an alternative approach; instead, they’ve positioned themselves as know-nothings lite, accepting the notion that spending must be slashed immediately — just not as much as Republicans want.

Mr. Obama’s political advisers clearly believe that this strategy of protective camouflage offers the president his best chance at re-election — and they may be right. But that doesn’t change the fact that the White House is aiding and abetting the dumbing down of our deficit debate.

Dumbing Deficits Down
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: March 10, 2011


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/opinion/11krugman.html?src=me&ref=general

[highplainsdem]

20. A "strategy of protective camouflage" - exactly. And it's a disaster for us, and will probably be a

disaster for the President as well.

[neverforget]

17. There's a populist movement building on the left. I'm afraid the Washington

bubble crowd doesn't see it at all. They seem to be too busy listening to Wall Street and the Beltway Pundits to listen to what is actually happening outside of DC.

[bobbolink]

26. I have no doubt they will also stand with WallStreet in fighting us with every weapon at their

command.

Which is why the middleclass protesters NEED us poor folk, but that isn't seen as important... yet.

[Left_Is_Right]

18. As pointed out in my other posts on DU...

Obama has over promised and under delivered. His audacity of hope is now viewed by many as the audacity of hype. While I expected more from him...as I thought I saw more...it's clear to me now...he really doesn't have the potential I thought I saw in him....The office of the Presidency I believe requires STONES...Stones to stand on your convictions....and pursue your objectives...compromise ONLY if there is a win....and not just for the sake of compromise. (which I believe his compromises have never been about a win...but rather than a cave in...it's as though he can't be bothered to fight for what he "said" he believes in.) I don't understand how so much wool...could have been pulled over so many hopeful eyes...

The saddest part....he may well end up being the most disappointing president in history....



Lefty,

[bobbolink]

21. Translated: Poor People, put your final affairs in order. SAYONARA!

Mass Hari Kiri will be the result.

Does it matter?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. If he was playing poker he'd hand over his shirt before the cards were dealt and proclaim victory.

[ProSense]

23. "Worried congressional Democrats" More complaining from anonymous Dems

From the OP article:

<...>

In the next week the action moves from Wisconsin to Washington, where the deadline looms for a possible government shutdown over the federal budget. President Obama has to take a more direct and personal role in that budget battle – both for the economy’s sake and for the sake of his reelection. But will he? Don’t count on it.

Worried congressional Democrats say the President needs to use his bully pulpit to counter defections in Democatic ranks, such as the ten Democrats and one allied Independent who on Wednesday voted against a Senate leadership plan to cut $6.2 billion from the federal budget over the rest of fiscal year 2011. They want Obama to grab the initiative and push a plan to eliminate tax breaks for oil companies and for companies that move manufacturing facilities out of the country, and a proposal for a surtax on millionaires.

Most importantly, they’re worried the President’s absence from the debate will result in Republicans winning large budget cuts for the remainder of the fiscal year – large enough to imperil the fragile recovery.

<...>

Here we go again. Typical bullshit from anonymous members of Congress. President Obama gave a huge speech about his budget. Remember the SOTU? The budget was sent to Congress. The President then had a series of meeting with Democrats. He met with them again on Wednesday. The Hill.

<...>

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), vice chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference, pointed out that the Democratic leadership speaks regularly with the president.

The four members of the leadership team met with Obama at the White House on Wednesday. But some rank-and-file Democrats in the chamber are exasperated at the Obama administration.

<...>

In addition, Biden is engaged in the negotiations. Also, almost every weekly address since the SOTU has been about the budget.

So what's the meme being promoted by the media and "some" Democrats: The President needs to be more engaged. What utter bullshit. Same BS spin took hold during the health care debate. Here's the hilarious line from The Hill article:

“He’s not greasing it like he did during healthcare,” said the source.

That's not what "the source" said during the health care debate.

Congress needs to do its friggin job and stop alway trying to pass the buck. They can start by approving the funds to close Guantanamo. They're a separate branch and should show some leadership too. While the President should take the lead, members of the Congressional leadership need to deal with their respective caucuses.

President Obama: "let’s not try to sneak political agendas into a budget debate"

[Autumn]

30. Complaining from anonymous Dems. Is that

the same as posts on a message board from an anonymous Dem slamming the complaining? :rofl: :rofl: Your sense of humor is really starting to show through.

[ProSense]

34. You think Dems should complain anonymously?

OK.

[Autumn]

35. I can see why some officials would not be willing to give their

names. Just like I can understand why you don't use your real name in your posts explaining what the administration really means when they say something and when they do something. Anonymous is ok by me.

No matter how you look at it, that dog don't hunt.

[nashville_brook]

25. Clinton had already moved the party to the right...Obama is moving off the cliff

[bobbolink]

29. Sadly, that cliff jump seems to be what a lot of party voters want.

:shrug: :grr:

[Octafish]

28. DLC = Damn Lotta Cowards

“A conservative is a man who is too cowardly to fight and too fat to run.” -- Elbert Hubbard (American editor, publisher and writer, 1856-1915)

[LiberalAndProud]

31. The article ascribes his motivations as looking to 2012.

Surely Obama is smart enough to recognize that it was his populist message that got him elected in 2008. Do they put something in the water in DC to make politicians believe that Rush really is the voice of the people? It seems to me that the cocoon around our nation's capitol is contaminated with ... something bad.

[madfloridian]

32. Locked in the Cabinet

From Reich's book of that name:

"The reviewer sets up the scenario by saying "Reich and his wife Clare, and Bill and Hillary go to Kinkaid's, an elegant restaurant on Pennsylvania Avenue. It's a good-bye dinner for Clare, who is going back to Cambridge with their two sons. Over dessert, Reich can't help himself."

'After all, we're balancing the budget and sacrificing public investment so that corporations have more money to invest. At the least, we should expect them to invest with their employees and communities in mind.'

There's an awkward pause. Have I overstepped the line?

'It seems to me,' says Clare, weighing her words carefully, 'that corporations are downsizing not only themselves but also a big part of the middle class.'

She's bailed me out. I want to kiss her on the spot. I throw caution to the winds and ask B, 'Would you be comfortable saying what Clare just said?'

'I have to keep myself from saying it everyday,' he says softly. 'I shouldn't be out in front on these issues. I can't be criticizing.'

Reich, the middle is fiction.

And more recently from Spiegel Online:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,726575,00.html

"Reich: I was there with Bill Clinton when he tried to socalled "triangulate" and please the voters in the middle. But the middle is a fiction. The middle is simply where most voters who respond to surveys say they are. What Clinton did and what Obama may be forced to do is to give up leadership; that is, to simply respond to polls. I think it would be a shame if Obama moved from leadership to opinion polls, but his advisors may feel that that's the only way to guarantee him a re-election.

[WinkyDink]

33. Obama talks a good game, but has zero stomach for battle.

[_ed_]

37. He's a follower, not a leader

.

[_ed_]

36. There's nothing to fight for once you've preempitvely surrendered to the other side

.