Today, President Obama’s bipartisan deficit commission failed to secure a sufficient votes from its members, so it didn’t release on official report. The chance that it would have even reached the required 14-vote minimum was remote for a variety of reasons. For example:
Selecting Alan Simpson, a cranky old jerk who loves to fight, as co-chair for a project that is supposed to build broad popular compromise does not help.
And Republicans doctrinal opposition to tax increases in any form makes things like a reasonable middle-point compromise nearly impossible. Probably more important, Congressional Republicans have time and time again proven that reducing the debt is simply not a priority, what with their decision not to pay for Medicare Part D, their support for two unfunded wars, and the recent fight to extend the budget-busting Bush tax cuts for the rich.
Republicans saying no to anything with “Obama” in the title
In retrospect, however, I think the main reason “Obama’s” deficit commission was always doomed to fail was even simpler. In this political environment, I don’t think Congressional Republicans would ever help pass what could be claimed as a historic bipartisan achievement anything labeled the “Obama something.” Even if Republicans liked most of the proposal, it would still be much smarter politics to make minor changes and claim most of the credit by introducing it in the House as the “Boehner-Ryan” plan. Same great austerity taste, but with a new, fancy, pro-Republican label. Why let Obama take credit?
Don’t be surprised if they do something like that for many parts of the basic Simpson-Bowles proposal (so, policy-wise, seniors citizens are not out of the woods when it comes to Medicare and Social Security cuts).
I take Mitch McConnell entirely at his word when he said his single most important goal is not reducing the deficit but making sure Obama is a “one term president.” Helping Obama pass a big, bipartisan proposal in such a way that lets Obama claim most of the credit for it doesn’t advance that goal.




4 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
I couldn’t agree more. This fight is not over.
Considering that Catfood Dems were every bit as willing to cut Social Security as Republicans, maybe we should thank Republicans for refusing to deal. Considering how much Obama is willing to surrender, gridlock may well be better than any deal he’d be willing to make. I mean tax cuts for billionaires and Social Security cuts for you and me is no deal I want.
Or thank them for their shortsightedness. I think their hatred for Obama is grounded in racism, and is so extreme that it leads them to do things that are not in their own best interest. Likewise, the libertarians among them are so reflexive in their opposition to any and all tax increases that they wind up shooting themselves in the foot. The Republicans would be better off endorsing the Catfood Commission report; the refusal of some of them to do so will help to consign it to well-deserved obscurity.
It’s a sad day for America. BHO has no fight in him. The Republicans regard him as a weak political coward.
BHO himself has provided most of the ammo for that opinion.
Read it and weep.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/03/opinion/03krugman.html?ref=global
The horror, , , the horror, , ,