Why not do this all the time?
by David Atkins (“thereisnospoon”)
One would think the Obama Administration would want to see articles like this from the New York Times frontpage every day of the year. First, the press gives Obama credit for a balanced approach to deficit reduction:
President Obama will unveil a deficit-reduction plan on Monday that uses entitlement cuts, tax increases and war savings to reduce government spending by more than $3 trillion over the next 10 years, administration officials said.
Credit for popular proposals including tax increases on the wealthy and drawdowns of unpopular wars:
Mr. Obama will call for $1.5 trillion in tax increases, primarily on the wealthy, through a combination of closing loopholes and limiting the amount that high earners can deduct…Senior administration officials who briefed reporters on some of the details of Mr. Obama’s proposal said that the plan also counts a savings of $1.1 trillion from the ending of the American combat mission in Iraq and the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan.
Props for not increasing the Medicare eligibility age:
Administration officials said that the Medicare cuts would not come from an increase in the Medicare eligibility age.
A show of strength by the President; no “weakness” or “capitulation” talk:
In laying out his proposal, aides said, Mr. Obama will expressly promise to veto any legislation that seeks to cut the deficit through spending cuts alone and does not include revenue increases in the form of tax increases on the wealthy.
After positive discussion of the Buffett Rule, hilarious defensive whining from Republicans that voters will see right through:
Representative Paul D. Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee and a leading proponent of cutting spending on benefit programs like Medicare, said the proposal would weigh heavily on a stagnating economy.
On “Fox News Sunday,” Mr. Ryan said it would add “further instability to our system, more uncertainty, and it punishes job creation.”
“Class warfare,” he said, “may make for really good politics, but it makes for rotten economics.”
And go figure: actual full-throated support from progressive groups, too:
Liberal-leaning organizations were rallying behind Mr. Obama’s proposals on Sunday.
“The report that the president is planning to ask millionaires and billionaires to pay taxes at a higher rate than their secretaries pay is welcome news that will be wildly popular with voters,” said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America’s Future, a progressive center, in a statement. “We applaud the president for heeding the advice from progressives that he go big on his jobs plan.”
One wonders why the Administration ever did business any other way. Isn’t this sort of coverage much better than what they’ve been getting for the last 18 months?
Oh, and one last bit: it appears progressives aren’t so powerless after all, and that Administration critics have had a positive effect not only on policy, but on the Administration’s approach to politics:
The Obama proposal has little chance of becoming law unless Republican lawmakers bend. But by focusing on the wealthiest Americans, the president is sharpening the contrast between Republicans and Democrats with a theme he can carry into his bid for re-election in 2012.
Mr. Obama’s proposal is also an effort to reassure Democrats who had feared that he would agree to changes in programs like Medicare without forcing Republicans to compromise on taxes. Indeed, Mr. Hickey warned in his statement that the president should not raise the Medicare eligibility age, advice that Mr. Obama, so far, seems to have heeded.
Let’s be clear: the President’s approach to politics over the previous 18 months has been just short of disastrous. If negative pressure from progressive groups was responsible for the President’s spine, then progressive critics will have saved the day and perhaps the 2012 election.
.