Has Obama Played Right into the GOP's Hands by Offering Chained CPI?

     On the face of it, you might think so. There's no question that the GOP has been waiting for Obama to "give them cover" a metaphor that suggests he should take the hits that come with offering the policies they want. Paul Ryan's budget didn't touch Social Security while it did block grant Medicare and devolve Medicaid back to the states.

      So, yeah, it's an understandable view and many people believe it, like Krugman's in his short and sweet post "Nobody could have predicted."


     http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/11/nobody-could-have-predicted-4/

      He links to a the pure chutzpah perpetuated by Republican Oregon Rep Greg Walden:

      "Remember those warnings about how instead of welcoming President Obama’s adoption of Chained CPI, Republicans would continue to deny him a budget deal and attack him for proposing to cut Social Security?"

      "Well Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) — who also happens to be chairman of the House GOP’s re-election committee — just showed how it’s done, saying Obama’s budget “lays out a shocking attack on seniors.”

     “I’ll tell you when you’re going after seniors the way he’s already done on Obamacare, taken $700 billion out of Medicare to put into Obamacare and now coming back at seniors again, I think you’re crossing that line very quickly here in terms of denying access to seniors for health care in districts like mine certainly and around the country,” he said on CNN Wednesday afternoon.

      "Needless to say, if the NRCC chairman is fronting this line of attack, we’ll probably see it pop up contested districts around the country next year."

     http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/nrcc-chair-blasts-obama-budget-as-shocking-attack-on-seniors.php?ref=fpb

     On one level it does seem to give them the ability to have their cake and eat it too: they et the chained CPI they wanted but they can claim it was all Obama's idea and even claim they hate it. Greg Sargent no doubt articulates the view of so many Obama skeptics:

     "Now, maybe you don’t believe that there’s much political value in staking out the compromising high ground in this debate, because the Very Serious Deficit Scolds in Washington won’t ever award Obama any real credit for doing this. And maybe you believe that offering Chained CPI will do nothing more than make it easier for Republicans to attack Dems for cutting Social Security in 2014 and 2016."

      "All I can say to that is that the White House views things differently. Obama advisers believe Republicans could just as easily attack him this cycle for cutting Social Security based on his previous support for Chained CPI. They think the lesson of 2012 (remember the failed “he raided Medicare to pay for Obamacare” talking point?) is that Dems can fend off this attack with relative ease. And from what I have been told, they are looking beyond just getting the approval of the Very Serious People. They want to establish a Beltway narrative that GOP devotion to protecting the wealth of the rich is what’s preventing a deal to replace the sequester, in hopes that it will seep into local news coverage of the cuts around the country as the pain of those cuts sinks in, weakening Republicans further."

       http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/why-obama-had-to-propose-chained-cpi.html

       http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/10/gop-leaders-cut-social-security-but-dont-tax-the-rich/\

        Boehner is also having it both ways. He is "distancing" himself from the NRCC's criticism of chained CPI though he could shut down this criticism if he truly wanted to. 

         "Of course, the right question for Boehner is not whether he agrees with Walden about Chained CPI. We already know he doesn’t. He said yesterday he supports the proposal. And he asked Obama for it during the fiscal cliff talks."

          "Rather, the right question for Boehner is: Will you ensure that the NRCC will not attack Dems over this in the 2014 elections? After all, the Speaker effectively controls the NRCC. It is the party committee devoted to electing Republicans to the House of Representatives. And the NRCC isclaiming that it stands by Walden’s comments, in which Walden clearly telegraphed that Republicans plan to make this an issue in 2014."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/11/john-boehner-distances-himself-from-the-nrcc-sort-of-anyway/

       I know this again seems to validate the narrative that he's played into their hands. Yet as noted above in Sargent's quote of what the White House is thinking, the 2012 attacks on the $716 billion in Medcare cuts didn't work-now Ryan is using these same cuts in his latest budget. 

      Just to add more angles to the picture, whether or not Boehner will put a muzzle on Walden, the Club For Growth already is. They are talking "primary" for his comments:

     "The Club for Growth, a conservative anti-tax, anti-spending group, said Thursday that it was looking for a primary challenger against Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, after he spoke out against President Barack Obama's plan to cut social security benefits"
.

   "We always knew Greg Walden had a liberal record, but he really cemented it with his public opposition to even modest entitlement reform," Club for Growth president Chris Chocola said in a statement. "Greg Walden has voted for bailing out Wall Street, dozens of pork projects, and against cutting the spending from the Obama stimulus. He even voted against blocking taxpayer subsidies for Viagra. Greg Walden should be held accountable for his anti-growth voting record as well as his anti-growth rhetoric."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/11/club-for-growth-greg-walden_n_3062526.html

     To add even more curves, Norquist and his group are opposed to chained CPI:

      "Americans for Tax Reform, the advocacy group that asks lawmakers to sign a formal "Taxpayer Protection Pledge," said Tuesday that chained CPI violates the pledge.

      "Chained CPI as a stand-alone measure (that is, not paired with tax relief of equal or greater size) is a tax increase and a Taxpayer Protection Pledge violation," the group said in a blog post.

        "Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist, leader of the organization, criticized the policy via Twitter on Wednesday. "Chained CPI is a very large tax hike over time," Norquist wrote. "Hence Democrat interest in same."

        http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/sumner-outraged-by-romney-rule.html

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/grover-norquist-chained-cpi_n_3052646.html

        Again, I return to my argument a few days ago in opposition to all the Obama haters at places like Firedoglake and Naked Capitalism: you have to play the whole board if you're in Obama's position. There are firebaggers now who are talking about starting a party just to protect SS. These are the same people who wanted to start a party just to beat Obama in 2012. 

     http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/naked-capitalism-commentators-obama-is.html?showComment=1365743961960#c3037116145756466160

     If we look at the whole board, things aren't looking so bad right now. Today the Senate voted to allow debate on gun control to begin. 

     http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/honk-if-you-miss-bush-cheney.html

     Gun control was supposed to a heavier lift than immigration which is also moving full speed ahead. 

      Now there's a new "Gang of Eight" in town to discuss the deficit. Ie, at least some Republicans are engaging in discussions about the budget. 

      http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/a-bipartisan-deficit-gang-is-brewing-in-senate-89980.html?hp=r1

      The GOP hopes the President has played into their hands and maybe they have convinced themselves of this. However, I think time will show it's the opposite.