It depends on what the definition of “common sense” is
by digby
At least he didn’t call it a gang:
President Barack Obama, unable to persuade Republicans to accept higher taxes, is attempting to cobble together what he calls a “common-sense caucus” among lawmakers to help resolve U.S. budget woes and push his legislative agenda.
On Monday and in recent days, Obama has made individual phone calls to a number of senators in a search for common ground on $85 billion in budget cuts that went into effect last week, as well as his top priorities like deficit reduction, gun control and an overhaul of U.S. immigration laws.
Gene Sperling, the White House senior economic official, said on the CNN program “State of the Union” on Sunday that Obama was contacting to lawmakers to talk about compromises that could include reforms to both the tax code and entitlement programs, which include Social Security retirement benefits and Medicare healthcare for the elderly and disabled.
I’ve written too many times about the possibility of some sort of deal that includes temporary tax “reform” in exchange for “entitlement” cuts, so I won’t say it again. But that’s what this sounds like to me. They will rationalize this by pointing out that the Chained-CPI will bring in revenue as well as cut benefits. And they will convince lots of liberals that this is the best they could do, Paul Ryan is even worse — and not to worry because the extra revenue they get from the Chained-CPI will be put to good use so it’s all good.
I don’t know that the Republicans will go along with this but I suppose if Boehner could cobble together just enough Republicans to get it over the hump, this could be a way out.
It may not be as easy as they think, however. Howie writes:
Is it possible that the political elites want to make it so painful that the public will accept the dreadful Simpson-Bowles Grand Bargain scenario? I think so– and that’s why the letter sent around Congress by Alan Grayson and Mark Takano states flatly– no wiggle-room– that “we will vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security benefits– including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need.” These are the signatories to this very bold, very line-in-the-sand letter:
• Alan Grayson (D-FL)
• Mark Takano (D-CA)
• Corrine Brown (D-FL)
• Matt Cartwright (D-PA)
• Kathy Castor (D-FL)
• John Conyers (D-MI)
• Danny Davis (D-IL)
• Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
• Keith Ellison (D-MN)
• Gene Green (D-TX)
• Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)
• Luis Gutierrez (D-IL)
• Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
• Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
• Barbara Lee (D-CA)
• Ed Markey (D-MA)
• Jim McGovern (D-MA)
• Jerry Nadler (D-NY)
• Grace Napolitano (D-CA)
• Rick Nolan (D-MN)
• Jose Serrano (D-NY)
• Nydia Velázquez (D-NY)
• Maxine Waters (D-CA)
This is the gold standard for Members of Congress willing to put their own careers on the line to protect working families…
It’s especially important because Boehner is being pressured from the right for more and deeper cuts and because Obama is looking for a way to keep the amount of cuts but to redistribute them more to his own liking. The fatal flaw– and it is proving very fatal throughout Europe– is that the government should be working on growth and stimulating job creation, not obsessing over already shrinking budget deficits in the middle of a severe economic crisis for working people.
And if everyone gets a break and if the sequester cuts do have impact in the next few months, count us as ones who are a bit optimistic that a Grand Bargain on the budget could be reached in September. Yes, we know that a Grand Bargain has been harder to find than the Loch Ness Monster.
But here’s how it could happen: After some breathing room, after both parties let their budget processes play out, and after evidence that the U.S. economy has been negatively impacted by the sequester, both sides could determine that a Grand Bargain is in their interest– Republicans decide they really, really want entitlement reforms and are willing to put up some additional revenue; Democrats decide they really, really want additional revenue and are willing to put up additional entitlement reform. And in September, the president and Democrats will have this response when Boehner and Republicans say, “The president got his tax increases.” They’ll be able to say, “The Republicans got their spending cuts.”
And that’s where a strategy like the one from the Grayson-Takano letter comes into play. It exempts cuts to the threadbare programs that most directly impact the people in the most need, the ones with the least clout inside the Beltway. To have a stalwart progressive, like Ed Markey (D-MA), who’s in a tough primary battle with ConservaDem Stephen Lynch, sign the Grayson-Takano letter is a real mark of political courage.
In fact, Blue America is starting a page to encourage people to show their gratitude to Grayson, Takano and to fearless progressives like Markey. Lynch, of course, has refused to sign the letter. The new ActBlue page is right here. Please visit it.
I’m sensing a total collapse among the liberal cognoscenti on this so it will be up to progressives to hold the line. The sequester is doing its magic. And it’s certainly possible that the GOP will never agree to anything ever. They really are that crazy.
But at some point I still believe the defense cuts are going to force some kind of a deal. And I have to think that at some point the Republicans will recall that the most successful ad campaign of their triumphant 2010 election was this one:
Update: Alan Grayson says:
“With the Norquist pledge, the Republicans have lined up on the side of millionaires, billionaires and multinational corporations. With our No Cuts pledge, we are lined up on the side of seniors, sick people, and poor people. We are comforting the afflicted, and they are comforting the comfortable.”
.