Obama's Chained CPI Proposal Calls GOP Bluff

     Many think that Obama just played into the GOP's hands with his chained CPI offer. This is understandable particularly in light of the game Boehner and NRCC chairman Greg Walden is playing. Boehner is having it both ways apparently, saying he "disagrees" with Walden's criticism of chained CPI and plan to use it against the Democrats in the 2014 election.

  
     "Walden’s position has infuriated conservatives who support Chained CPI, but he’s sticking with it, anyway. In a must read, Roll Call’s Jonathan Strong captures the meaning of this dynamic perfectly:

The debate Walden’s remarks has set off inside the GOP shows many Republicans harbor deep-seated fears about publicly supporting the entitlement cuts they supposedly back and have demanded Obama and other Democrats embrace since taking control of the House in 2011.
“Walden is doing the right thing for the 30 seats that control the majority of the House, and that’s what the mission of NRCC chair is,” said Brock McLeary, the president of Harper Polling and a former top political hand at the NRCC.

      "Got that? Walden is doing the right thing politically for Republicans by attacking Dems over a proposal that GOP leaders say they want Dems to embrace. Not only that, but Boehner — who claims he disagrees with Walden — won’t call on him to stand down, and actually finds the whole thing funny:

Boehner declined to publicly urge Walden not to use chained CPI to attack Democrats, noting again that he had talked to Walden and “we’ll leave it at that.” Asked later in a Capitol hallway what he said to Walden, the speaker just laughed.

     "Similarly, I was unable yesterday to get Boehner’s office to say whether he wants Chained CPI to be taken off the table in the 2014 elections."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/12/the-morning-plum-the-gops-policy-nihilism/

     No doubt many conclude Obama has harmed himself for little gain. Krugman has argued that he just did this to win over the VSP that can't be won over. No doubt Sargent sums up the attitude of many liberal critics:

      "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/has-obama-played-right-into-gops-hands.html

    Sargent speaks of this again this morning:

    "In one sense, this validates the worst fears on the left that if Obama proposed Chained CPI it would expose Dem candidates to GOP charges that they want to take away grandma’s Social Security. This is a legitimate fear, and Democrats should not embrace Chained CPI, which is horrible policy. But it’s also true that Dems all but certainly won’t have to vote on the proposal. And for what it’s worth, some Dems I’ve spoken to believe they can win the argument over entitlements in spite of Obama’s support for Chained CPI, and that public perceptions that Dems are willing to compromise to solve problems — and Republicans aren’t — is a net positive for them."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/04/12/the-morning-plum-the-gops-policy-nihilism/

    I think that's an important point: the Dems won't have to vote on it. This has been one point I've repeatedly made: just because Obama has proposed it doesn't mean he will actually ever sign it or even plans to ever sign it.

   What this has done is call the GOP bluff. While I don't hold the VSP in any higher regard than Krugman, I don't think it's always futile in trying to educate them; I don't think Obama only did chained CPI for them either but also for the larger mainstream public to demonstrate the GOP's bad faith.

    The reason I say it isn't wholly futile in educating the VSP is because they do sometimes learn it just takes them a very long time. Like they've finally-very belatedly-gotten it that Paul Ryan is not at all serious. Now many of the editorials seem to be getting it about the larger GOP.

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-the-gops-turn-to-be-serious-with-the-budget/2013/04/11/0d7afb08-a2d9-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_story.html?hpid=z3

    "But Mr. Obama has injected a courageous note of realism where the Republicans so far have shown none. He has proposed modest revenue increases, and by a reasonable method: capping the value of tax deductions in a way that does not diminish the incentives for charitable giving or homeownership. He has proposed modest brakes on the growth of Social Security and Medicare, to the horror of more rigid members of his party."

   "Some Republican leaders responded dismissively. The entitlement reform was too “modest” to justify the tax hikes, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) said. House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (Wis.) said the Social Security reduction was simply “clarifying a statistic which does happen to save money.” The House Republican campaign honcho, Rep. Greg Walden (Ore.), had the gall to accuse Mr. Obama of “trying to balance this budget on the backs of seniors” — this, after Republicans have spent months attacking the president for not reining in entitlements."

    "The pooh-poohing would be easier to take if the GOP had a real-world plan of its own. Instead, it pretends it can balance the budget without raising taxes — but also without ever specifying the details of the spending that would be decimated, discretionary or otherwise. Mr. Ryan and others so far have wanted credit for fiscal prudence without political cost."

    "Plenty of Republicans know better, and it’s time for them to step up. There are adults in the party who understand that revenue will have to rise, entitlements will have to be reduced and, for anything to be accomplished, the political pain of both will have to be shared."

     "It was encouraging to hear Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) repudiate Mr. Walden’s irresponsible statement Thursday and say that he was “encouraged” by aspects of Mr. Obama’s budget. We’ve heard similar sentiments from other Republicans, speaking quietly and off the record. Now that Mr. Obama has anted up, it’s time for them to be a bit louder."

     http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/its-the-gops-turn-to-be-serious-with-the-budget/2013/04/11/0d7afb08-a2d9-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_story.html?hpid=z3

     Don't get me wrong, it's not that I have a super high opinion of the VSP. However, they do disseminate  news stories and editorials and tv analysis that many people are exposed to. If they are finally starting to get it a little this will be nudge in the right direction regarding public awareness which is a main ingredient to force the GOP back to the negotiating table.