What is the Optimum Sequester Strategy for Obama and the Dems?

    Many liberals seem to assume the worst the minute the President does anything, so the first thing you heard a lot of last week after Obama's "Take the Republicans Out to Dinner" offensive last week was that he's all set to take a meat ax to what Ed Schultz calls the "Big Three."

    I don't think it's a bad strategy actually though I've grown weary with the GOP taking the sanctimonious posture of 'Good start. Now let's see if he's serious.'

   http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/03/nancy-pelosi-calls-out-gop-chutzpah-on.html

    Some Republican strategists admitted it's a good strategy as it enables Obama to take advantage of a weak party with lots of divisions. To be sure, today there's a story in Politico where Republicans are insisting that GOP leadership must be "involved" for any deal to happen, and leadership in Boehner and McConnell have refused to even consider revenues. They say 'The President got his revenues' ignoring that by this definition they have got 'their spending cuts' many times over.

     http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/gop-senators-not-eager-to-buck-their-leaders-88671.html?hp=l6

     As Greg Sargent tells us, the White House believes that getting a budget deal done is an uphill process.

     The New York Timesreports that some Republican Senators are privately expressing an openness to a big deal that involves new revenues. But the White House is aware that the path to any compromise remains steep:

“Hopefully there’s an opportunity to work things out through regular order in the House and Senate,” said Dan Pfeiffer, a senior adviser to Mr. Obama. “How likely is that? I can’t say very likely — there are strong structural forces in the Republican Party working against it. But if you try and fail you still have an opportunity to build bonds of trust that could be helpful on other issues.”

     "I continue to maintain that the politics of the sequester are unpredictable, and that when the bite of spending cuts really sinks in you could see a situation where Republicans are suddenly more willing to entertain new revenues as a way out. Of course, the White House wooing of Republicans is also designed to make this more likely by portraying Obama as the one reaching out for compromise — perhaps making the GOP’s non-compromising position harder to sustain."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/03/11/the-morning-plum-didnt-we-just-have-an-election/

     In addition you have the Ezra Klein suggestion that maybe form a Democratic perspective we're better off now: the Dems should consider giving up the demand for more taxes in exchange they get military cuts and no entitlement cuts. A case can be made that this is preferable. As for the concern that the sequester will harm the recovery, Klein argues that as the GOP itself is already discussing giving the president discretion on just what gets cut, maybe a deal can be reached that also gives him discretion for when the cuts happen. 

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/07/how-to-fix-sequestration-without-raising-taxes/

     The major wild card is the impact this has on the economy and how much pain Americans feel-and how quickly. A piece in Talking Points Memo argues that while the GOP and Bob Woodward's Very Serious Media quibble about whether Obama exaggerated thier impact or whether it was necessary to cancel a White House tour, regular Americans are already taking a hit:

     If beltway news reflected events in the country at large, the worst consequences of sequestration would amount to griping over politically motivated spending cuts, or programs spared.

     "That kind of coverage stems from a GOP effort to identify unpopular and cynical sequestration cuts and lay them at the feet of the Obama administration lest the public regard them as a direct consequence of sequestration itself."

      "But outside of Washington DC, sequestration is already causing real problems for regular people, and Democrats are engaged in a counteroffensive — highlighting the day-in, day-out problems sequestration is causing outside of the capital."

      "Last week, Democratic sources provided TPM with dozens of print and television news stories documenting the impact of sequestration in the states. Below are a representative example."

       http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/outside-washington-sequestration-begins-to-inflict-pain.php?ref=fpb

     The samples show that teachers and other government workers have already been hit. 

      "From the Cronkite News: “An Arizona school superintendent said Monday that her district has already cut 40 positions because of automatic federal spending reductions and will recommend cutting 65 more and closing three schools next year to save money.”

       The Dayton Daily News learned: “Furloughed Air Force civilian workers would cost Ohio’s economy $111.1 million in lost wages through September.”

       "In Las Vegas, “More than 220 local FAA workers received notices that they will have to take some unpaid days off.”

         "And on Fort Drum in Waterstown, NY, “civilian employees on post will be forced to take one day off per week without pay.”

         There are also construction projects hit and air travel slowed down:

         "In South Bend, Ind.,, “A $30 million dollar construction project … is delayed because of the sequester budget cuts.”

         "The Charlotte Observer notes, “Closing the control tower at Concord Regional Airport could cost the city hundreds of charter flights from NASCAR teams and other businesses, local officials said Wednesday after learning that the tower’s federal funding is being eliminated. … Concord officials said they were notified Tuesday by the Federal Aviation Administration that funding would be cut off soon.”