Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Unions, MoveOn Warn Obama Not to 'Cave' in Secret Negotiations With House GOP
The Obama White House is reportedly in the process of negotiating a secret debt deal with House Republican leaders that could include deep cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. The deal would not, according to media reports, significantly or immediately address the need for new revenues that can be derived from fair taxation of the wealthiest Americans.
That’s a bad deal.
Bad for American seniors and Americans who anticipate that one day they will be seniors.
Bad for the American economy.
And bad for Barack Obama politically.
So unions and progressive groups have moved to prevent any deal from moving forward.
MoveOn.org, AFL-CIO, CREDO Action, Democracy for America, PCCC, AFT, Campaign for America’s Future and Change Nation organized an Emergency Call-In Day “to demand Democrats in the House and Senate stand strong and keep their promises to reject any debt deal that slashes programs for seniors and working families while doing little or nothing to make the rich and corporations pay their share.”
Tens of thousands of call were being made Friday to Democrats in the House and Senate “demanding that they reject the terrible deal being reportedly negotiated by the White House.”
And union leaders were speaking up in blunt opposition to any compromise by the president and the Democrats on the issue of preserving Medicare.
“If press reports about a potential deal on deficit reduction turn out to be true, Medicaid will be eviscerated, access to healthcare for millions of Americans will be gutted and millions of jobs will be lost. This is morally wrong and Congress should not allow it to happen,” declared Service Employees International Union president Mary Kay Henry.
“Reported revenue measures in the deal are worse than the ‘Gang of Six’ proposal and let corporations and millionaires off the hook and avoid paying their fair share,” continued Henry, whose union has long been closely aligned with Obama. “On behalf of 2.1 million members, SEIU will not support a deal with these outcomes.”
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders was already rallying opposition to any deal that cuts Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, saying: “The time is now for the American people to become significantly involved in that debate and not leave it to a small number of people here in Washington.”
MoveOn.org executive director Justin Ruben warned: “Any deal that slashes programs for seniors and working families while doing nothing to make the rich and corporations pay their share is a total non-starter and Democrats in Congress should rule it out immediately.”
“The Democratic base did not work night and day to elect Democrats so that they could cave to Tea Party extremists who are intent on gutting the social safety net millions of us fought to establish and protect,” explained Ruben, who notes that House minority leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate majority leader Harry Reid have worked long and hard to highlight Democratic opposition to this sort of deal. “Leaders Pelosi and Reid have been clear that a deal that includes no revenues, or that cuts Social Security and Medicare benefits, cannot get the votes of their respective caucuses. Democratic Members of Congress must keep up this strong stance. Anything less would represent a betrayal of everything Democrats stand for.”
Obama and his aides want to cut a deal.
But they cannot cut just any deal.
If the White House assaults programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, the president will find—either quickly, via opposition from Congressional Democrats, or over time, via the collapse of energy and enthusiasm among his party’s activist base—that he is negotiating away not just his party’s legacy but perhaps the prospect of his own reelection.
142 Comments so far
Show AllJesus H Christ Nichols!!!! Calling this callous destruction of the minimal social safety net we've had in this country "a bad deal" trivializes the impact it will have on the lives of millions of Americans, many of whom, are barely hanging on for survival now.
For a smart man, you're either suffering from abused spouse syndrome, or a paid lackey of the administration whose job is to keep disaffected democrats from bolting the party to build a new non-corporate third party and challenge the existing power structure.
Obama doesn't care about his "base". He sure as hell doesn't care about low income workers and seniors. His campaign coffers will be flush with corporate cash because he's doing a brilliant job of carrying out the neocon agenda, better than any republican has ever been able to, i.e. shrinking government to drown it in a bath tub.
He's certainly not worried about re-election. There will be plenty of book deals, lucrative speaking engagements, and board memberships awaiting him for a job well done, regardless of whether he's one term or not. In fact, if he's a one termer, he gets to enjoy those perks all the sooner.
Yes, the millions of dollars Obama will rake in for the cushy corporate gigs after he leaves the White House will make his presidential salary ($400k per year) look like chump change.
To call it a "cave in" implies that Obama started the discussion in a populist position.
Obama offered up Social Security and the medical programs right out of the gate without the Republicans even asking for them. Obama is not caving in, he is proactively destroying these programs.
Who's next? NLRB, the EPA, how about privatizing the Coast Guard? Dam I just can't belive anymore >^^<
Obama wants to default on the 2.4 trillion dollars that Social Security holds in Treasuries. That's what cutting Social Security really means. It means defaulting on the Treasuries owned by the working people of this country. So, far from trying to avoid a default, Obama is trying to engineer a default and the corporate media, John Nichols included are going along with it by not calling "cutting Social Security" a default on public debt.
Exactly. The idea that Obama is worried about veiled threats from Unions or MoveOn is hilarious!
Would you mind explaining; I don't quite understand your comment about the unions. Do you think the union members themselves aren't supportive of protecting their jobs and their clients? Or do you mean their bosses know nothing can be done? Or are you saying that the unions are really against these cuts but Obama isn't going to take them seriously because they are losing power. Are the unions still on our side?
The Unions are on their own side. They've allowed their membership to be decimated to such an extent over the past 60 years (from 34% to 7% for "private" sector unions) --- while their leadership gets fat, soft, and sells out --- that they no longer have a positive effect on jobs for over 80% of the total workforce (all non-union workers). And they have NO balls anymore to use their resources and membership to organize and execute serious acts of resistance --- like STRIKING to get what they really want and need (e.g., collective borrowing, EFCA, worker friendly trade deals, etc.....). Let's face it, we're all lazy cowards that don't know what "collective" self-sacrifice is or means, and neither does the oldest organized constituency of workers in the country --- LABOR! They are NO threat to OBAMA or any Democratic President anymore. They've been reduced to a special interest scrounging to hold on to their last shred of jobs, earnings, and benefits. And they're even steadily losing that battle. Sadly, they've become an embarrassment as an institution.
Remember Ralph Nader's comment that people raged against right after the election? Something to the effect "It remains to be seen if Obama is an Uncle Sam for the American people or an Uncle Tom for the corporations." How prescient was that call? I see little hope for us in the Democratic Party. We need to get a new 3rd party that everyone can support. Democratic Socialists?
I can't stand the way the human element has been suppressed from all the articles and news shows. It's so much easier to take life-saving medicine, oxygen and critical medical care away from people when both parties call it "entitlement cuts." It's so easy for Congress and the Administration to talk about "not getting everything we want" as if we want unnecessary gadgets. We want the right to live and to be healthy.
There have *already* been cuts to Medicaid and Medicare. Medicaid in particular keeps getting slashed and people are already physically hurting from this. I know someone who's friend is on oxygen and ever since the Medicaid slashes last year they are not paying for her oxygen! She can't afford to pay for it, nor can she afford to pay her rent due to the increased medical bills.
The most vulnerable people in our nation, the housebound disabled, depend on home health aides for their very lives. Some of them can't eat unless someone cooks for them and feeds them. Some can't even go to the toilet on their own. Many rely on them to make sure they take their life-saving medication on time. Medicaid is the program that pays for home health aides. If someone is poor enough to qualify for Medicaid and they lose their home health aide services, they will not have a good chance at survival. These are not just elderly people, but children, teens, adults and sometimes even parents of young children. These people are Americans and more importantly, human beings. If anyone thinks that just because someone has a severe disability that they have nothing to offer society, just look at the intellectual genius and accomplishments of Stephen Hawking.
I just am so disgusted with the lives of human beings dismissed and treated as nothing but trading chips to get-rich-quick schemes. I am fighting back. Who will fight with me? http://dontcutmedicaid.wordpress.com
Don'tcutmedicaid I'm already fighting with you, because I work with vent and trach patients and I couldn't agree more that cutting medicaid and medicare and social security is a death sentence for many of them. But let's be clear: a death sentence is what the oligarchy is aiming for.
The rich and powerful do not think climate change and peak oil are a hoax however much they claim to in order to keep profits up. They know that food, fuel, water and most other resources will soon be in very short supply. So their response is simple, cut SS payments, homeless seniors will die off quickly. Slash medicaid and medicare, that gets rid of the disabled and the elderly, stop Planned Parenthood who only spend 1% of their budget on abortion and the rest is healthcare, esp cancer screening for poor women, that reduces population even more. Pay retail price for prescriptions for Medicare, that kills off more seniors who can't afford their meds. Do nothing about unemployment; homeless people die young. And just to take out the rest of the world, lots of wars and slash all foreign aid programs.
The poor, the sick and the elderly are being betrayed by our politicians (with a very few honorable exceptions) because the population is being thinned of what they consider "useless breathers". The oligarchs don't just want all the money, they want what's left of this planets resources for themselves as well.
nohobear … Obama is representing his supporter base. I voted for Obama and may be compelled to again, knowing full well that he has a quid pro quo allegiance to Wall Street. Lets be honest, some of Obama’s last election campaign contributors were also, Goldman Sachs $955,473 Citigroup $653,468 JP Morgan Chase & Co. $646,058 Morgan Stanley $485,823 Lehman Brothers $276,088 Bank of America $274,493 Wachovia $214,151 AIG $112,170. This represents just a sampling of the election winner’s Wall Street Bank’s campaign contributors, the loser had an equally impressive, corporate bank purchased, political quid pro quo allegiance.
Then too, Obama’s like minded and corporate business indoctrinated academic contributors were, University of California $1,591,395, Harvard University $854,747, Stanford University $586,557, Columbia University $528,302
Now why would any cognitively capably individual say that Obama’s political allegiances, were not and still are, with Wall Street’s financial district.
Democrats as the lesser of two evils. I find philosophic agreement in Will Roger’s quote, "The Democrats and the Republicans are equally corrupt where money is concerned. It's only in the amount where the Republicans excel."
Burchar- sorry, but I don't understand your post. You've just detailed all the corporate sponsors that have bought Obama, but you say you are compelled to vote for him again? Or were you sarcastically quoting the typical attitude of an Obama supporter?
For my part, I too voted for this duplicitous sack of excrement in '08, even foolishly donated some money which I could ill afford. I don't think I will ever forgive myself for having been so bamboozled by this supreme con artist.
Beyond Obama, it is the Democratic party that has sold out. And I have vowed to myself to spend my energies on the birth of a third party challenge to this corrupt duopoly. This is one frog that is jumping out of the hot water now.
Honestly though, I think our days are numbered, as both a country and as a species. If I live another 25 years, I feel I shall live to see the US disintegrate ala the Soviet Union.
This government and many others have been hijacked by the Corporatists. In the name of unbridled greed they will destroy democracy, and ultiimately, the planet.
"It will be bad for Obama politically..."
.
Yes. yes .... that's what we need to concern ourselves with - O's re-election prospects.
.
Nichols has to be the worst Obamapologist on CD.
Bernie Sanders will not cave in but I have little faith that the democrats in congress or moveon will stand firm. When crunch time comes the democrats with very few exceptions will sell out as they always do.
MoveOn has another petition going so Obama won't "cave." Oh, please!!! These articles and organizations like this are excruciating. They are the reason Obama is getting away with what he is. When does it stop?
A petition! That'll show 'em. When does it stop? indeed. Well said.
If move-on was serious they would be demanding Obama resign or they would be grooming a populist candidate to run against him.
Exactly. MoveOn and Daily Kos led the charge in excoriating Dennis Kucinich when he was still holding out on HCR. It really was surreal watching these so-called progressive groups viciously going after someone for taking a strong progressive stance. There are just some things that stand out so starkly that you don't forget.
raydelcamino,
MoveOn is funded by George Soros a Democrat.
They won't stop with these laughable petitions and pledges until they get the last dime (and email address) from the suckers that will still bite.
MoveOn's "petitions" are really thinly-veiled fundraising drives. Sign their "petition," and you'll be hammered by requests for money until long after you die.
It stops when we who see through the lies stand together. It stops when we educate others that what they've been told is false. You seem to know more than I do about who is running and funding these groups, so let me ask you, are there *any* groups left who are truly fighting for the people and not just pretenders trying to offer us false hope and change? Where do we find the true progressives and how do we network with them?
"That's a bad deal.
Bad for American seniors and Americans who anticipate that one day will be seniors.
Bad for the American economy.
And bad for Barack Obama politically."
But good for the super rich.
Good for Wall Street.
Good for the corporate plutocracy.
Good for Mr. Obama's personal economic 'portfolio'.
And maybe even good for Obama politically since our system runs on $$$$$$.
Look for a deal to get done.
Selling out populist programs will assure that corporations give Obama the billion dollar 2012 campaign war chest that he covets.
Ray, They'll give him a bonus from a hedge fund that will be taxed at a lower capital gains rate!
“On behalf of 2.1 million members, SEIU will not support a deal with these outcomes."
But you will continue to support Obama, correct?
Yup ... right along with the PCCC and MoveOn ... John Nichols, KvdH and the rest of the professional left in general.
"Professional left" is a smear term used by people such as Rahm Emmanual & Robert Gibbs to describe disloyal liberals who criticize Obama.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/113431-white-house-unloads-on-professional-left
It is also a smear term used by rabid right-wingers to denounce Obama supporters and anyone else to the left of Milton Friedman.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/professional-left-still-loyal-obama_574972.html
There is almost nothing resembling a 'professional' left in the U.S. other than a smattering of academics, a handful of old school trade unionists, etc.
There is a fair amount of leftist sentiment still swirling around in the public mind that has yet to be extirpated by corporate Pravda & the numerous very well FUNDED right-wing think tanks such as Cato, American Enterprise Institute, Heartland Institute, etc. -- not to mention the pro-corporate U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/american-enterprise-institute
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/shifting1
But no one gets paid in this country to hold leftist viewpoints--despite the malarky from Fox Noise. (If they do get paid, please forward my checks.)
There are Democratic Party loyalists but they have little to do with the actual 'left' -- professional or amateur.
Blue team cheerleaders and little else ... I agree. They will all stand behind Obummer regardless of what he does. They probably want O to do the right thing so that they don't have to feel all dirty inside when they support him. Cuz right or wrong .. they're still going to support him.
.
I'd say Chomsky is a real leftist, Norman Mailer when he was alive .. Howard Zinn, Gore Vidal, Amy Goodman ... They exist, but yeah, you're not going to find them on MSNBC or NPR anytime soon.
"I'd say Chomsky is a real leftist, Norman Mailer when he was alive .. Howard Zinn, Gore Vidal, Amy Goodman ... They exist, but yeah, you're not going to find them on MSNBC or NPR anytime soon."
Seriously, I don't think they want to be on MSNBC or NPR. Its not their niche.
Speaking of MSNBC, I have switched over to Al Gore's "Currents" channel so I can watch Keith Olbermann (8pm, EST).
As a guest, Keith had on Cenk Uygur (former host of the 6pm slot on MSNBC--that once quasi-liberal channel), last night. Apparently, Cenk was told that his bosses didn't like his "tone," that he was "too aggressive" with his arm movements. After offering him some unspecified work on weekends, which he refused, Cenk was canned.
Who will be next? Will there be no MSM channel that even 'hints' at a progressive viewpoint? Probably not.
If we didn't know by now standing behind Obummer gets you one thing, Shit upon! just like standing behind a mule! >^^<
Thank you, Randy, for another solid, well-reasoned post. I see it pretty much the way you do (on this one).
The Professional Left are morons who join MoveOn (they usually move off at crunch time) PCCC etc. and people like John Nichols who'll be paid handsomely by MSNBC and the Dimocratic Party for being political pundits and consultants. These folks are neither professional nor left. They're full of hot air.
They aren't even very smart: People like Nichols aren't paid handsomely at all. They shill for peanuts.
Good job on the transparency, Mr. President.
It's hard not to sound like a broken record while responding to the daily news out of Washington, DC. The most recent polls indicate that 80 Percent --YES 80 PERCENT--of the American people do not want to see cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. That is a politician's dream--if the politician is, indeed, seeking to strengthen his party's base. All the politician has to do is represent the will of the American people and ride the momentum to victory in the fall elections.
So what explains the seemingly irrational, fly-in-the-face attitude toward the American people that is becoming increasingly apparent in the Obama administration?
In the Machiavellian nightmare that constitutes American politics, Obama and those who control him clearly do not want to strengthen the progressive base. In fact, that is the last thing they want to do. They want to destroy the progressive base. So there is no way they can take advantage of the obvious gift of an electorate that has reached a critical mass of 80 percent who support the social safety net.
The latest news out of our nation's capital, incidentally, is that the Obama administration has proposed cuts to all three of these social programs, in return for some very tenuous, easily neutralized promises of tax increases on the wealthy ruling class sometime in the future.
Although there is some talk about a "possible revolt" among other Democrats in the House and Senate, I have no illusions that they will represent the will of the American people when the final votes are taken.
If this was the Democratic Party of FDR, it would immediately seize the opportunity to represent 80 percent of the American people and put their party in the driver's seat for several decades--as was the case after the Democratic Party created the social safety network in the 1930s.
That will never happen under our current two-party system that clearly no longer represents the American people.
So the other question is, "What has happened historically when a government, any government in any country, no longer represents 80 percent of its people?"
I doubt very much that "American exceptionalism" will protect us from the social, political and economic upheaval that will occur in a nation where the people are rendered so powerless they have no recourse for change through their political system.
Two 'thumbs up' for Old Guy. Very well said.
Ditto.
Well said. I'd go even farther to say it only represents the top 1% because the other 19% who don't care about these programs now will change their tune if and when they become disabled or retire. And even wealthy people can lose their entire fortunes.
We have to do something to combat the mainstream media, because it is distracting people and feeding them misinformation. We have to get the truth out.
I fear the closest you will see to a "revolt" or any other action will be that people won't vote at all! and as usual the winner by 10K or less votes will come out claiming a mandate! They don't listen to us now, and yes it can get worse! If Obomber gets another 4yrs! >^^<
MoveOn: "Any deal that slashes programs for seniors and working families while doing nothing to make the rich and corporations pay their share is a total non-starter and Democrats in Congress should rule it out immediately."
----------------
First and most shockingly MoveOn apparently admits to its members that they approve of some degree of "slashing" to the social safety net.
Second, MoveOn states the rich should pay their "share" (notice they don't even say FAIR share) but doesn't quantify what that share should be. This makes this statement almost meaningless.
This press release is nothing but code to the Obama administration announcing that MoveOn's support for him and his scum bag billionaire friends will not be broken even if it means poverty and destitution for all their members.
Knowing that their members are none too bright MoveOn doesn't even take care to craft a shrewd press statement to better conceal their true nature from their members who they know will mindlessly continue to support their own extinction.
Wow. I wasn't aware of that :( Are there any groups that really are fighting for NO cuts to Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security?
I just signed an e-letter from the ARC to my elected officials, and the form letter said not to make "deep cuts." I erased that and said not to make "ANY" cuts and that a cut by any other name is still a cut, whether it's called a "payroll tax holiday" or a "change to the cost of living adjustment" or a "chained CPI." Perhaps I should email them about changing the format of their letter. It could have been an honest mistake because they really need the money.
Thanks for the heads up about MoveOn. I think I will be moving *away* from them.
MoveOn makes a statement. How quaint.
:O).
Well, there's a couple of points I'd like to present. Slapping more money on Medicare is a real waste of this nations heritage. Show me the health! We are over the barrel on this, corporate mores turn our citizens into diabetic, cancer ridden, organ failing, depressed, non contributing patients, and all the other struggling and most likely diseased hard working individuals clench jawed as they pay their overwhelming taxes so some physician can be underpaid to prescribe overpriced drugs.
You noticed...
I am so tired of so called progressives pretending that Obama is anything less than a complete lackey of the oligarchy which has destroyed our Republic and intends to deprive of us of the few scraps we have left of a bygone era when the middle class had some measure of political influence. I fully believe that Obama spends his time strategizing about how to undermine and destroy the middle class, perhaps, even more so than the Tea Party Republicans. At least they have a genuine ideology that involves more than simply consolidating power into the hands of a tiny group of oligarchs that are not even beholden to any flag or nationality. I voted for this scumbag, but now I think McCain Palin would have been better. At least then we would have an opposition. All truly progressive Democrats who remain in office MUST BE FORCED TO LEAVE THE PARTY or lose any support they have from those of us who believe in the New Deal (80% of the country).
I hear you ajl, Obama is certainly not supporting anything remotely progressive, he even admits it himself these days.
I do have to mention though, that the Tea Party do not have a genuine ideology. They were created by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) a group who creates model legislation that favors billionaires, oil companies, etc. They write laws that will end regulations on polluters so that the companies who pay them will be able to keep more profits. http://www.thenation.com/article/161978/alec-exposed
You're right, if McCain had won, the apologist left would be up in arms about all these horrible things that they currently give Obama a pass for. Their hubris in being unwilling to admit we were all duped is going to make many of us lose our essential medical care, our home health aides, our right to life-saving drugs.
The trouble is that many on the left are so disillusioned with the idea of a third party because of what happened in the 2000 election when W stole the election. They are terrified of letting a right-winger get elected. Then they use that fear to reprimand all of us who are trying to effect a real change. It is very distressing and hard to find a place to turn because you don't know whom you can trust these days.
"dontcut"
Yes, many of the pseudo-left are so "terrified of letting a right-winger get elected" that they vote for a right-winger.
That is what this hairpiece Nichols is trying to achieve.