President Obama unveils populist budget

[ProSense]

President Obama unveils populist budget

by Laura Clawson

ABC News previews President Obama's budget. At this point, it's all about setting the media narrative:

President Obama today officially unveils a 2013 budget that outlines his tax and spending priorities for the coming year, and doubles down on populist proposals central to his re-election campaign. [...]

But with little chance that Congress will enact the agenda, and many of the included proposals already rejected, the presentation will be largely a moment of political theater aimed at projecting an image of the president as a “warrior for the middle class.”

The budget includes $350 billion in jobs programs and $476 billion in infrastructure spending, which is effectively also jobs creation. These measures would include transportation projects, modernizing schools, and keeping teachers, police, and fire fighters on the job. The president also, once again, wants the Bush tax cuts for families earning more than $250,000 a year to expire, and adding a Buffett Rule provision, in which if you make more than $1 million, you pay a minimum tax rate of 30 percent.

But, you know, because Republicans will reject all of these much-needed and generally popular measures, it's "political theater."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/13/1064339/-Obama-prepares-to-unveil-populist-budget

[Kingofalldems]

1. That's why we need to take back the House and keep the Senate

And then act like real Democrats.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. So, what are the odds of such a budget being enacted

if we actually manage to get him majorities in both Houses?

A) 1%
B) 3%
C) 5%
D) You're a hopeless optimist

[Arkana]

3. Depends on how big the majorities are and what kind of people comprise them.

A large majority is absurdly difficult to govern.

[bbinacan]

29. 0% n/t

[CAPHAVOC]

42. Senate will vote in down.

Just like last year.

[SlimJimmy]

49. They didn't just vote it down, they murdered it. 97 to zip or something like that.

[CAPHAVOC]

51. No doubt.

These budgets are a joke anyway. Based on long term incorrect assumptions. Garbage in Garbage out.

[SlimJimmy]

52. Yep

[ProfessionalLeftist]

4. At this point, it's about drawing a stark contrast between Obama

and the Grand Old Psychopath party.

[ProSense]

6. Exactly.

It's going to be interesting to hear them complain.

[angry citizen]

54. learn from the Republicans

President should be calling the Republican plans "trickle down". The repubs are masters at asigning damaging lables like "Obama Care". The president needs to get better at this

[AtomicKitten]

5. The Rs will reject it and continue to complain that Ds have no budget.

[Puzzler]

30. Agreed ... but the GOP will reject anything Obama proposes anyway

[Fearless]

7. I wish these populist values came out through the ENTIRE presidency so far...

Yes yes, flame away, but it's true. After the election they tamped down the populist rhetoric and now they're ramping it back up again.

[Bandit]

9. Yes and I fully expect them to be tamped back down right after Obama wins.

Obama is NOT a Progressive President....At the very best is center right and at worst is a mere puppet for Right Wing extremists. By puppet I mean willing to bow to their commands at most opportunities.

[JoePhilly]

11. He is also alleged to kick puppies competitively for distance and accuracy.

[Scootaloo]

18. Before eating them

Probably in an Olive Garden

[Bandit]

19. You have it ALL wrong...it is kittens he eats, not puppies...

but he also often capitulates to Republicans...

[a2liberal]

39. +1 to you and Fearless (n/t)

[ProSense]

20. People

"I wish these populist values came out through the ENTIRE presidency so far..."

...seem to overlook at lot of what has actually happened.

The Bomb Buried In Obamacare Explodes Today-Hallelujah!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294855

Consumer groups call on Federal Reserve to break up Bank of America
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002233756

Volcker Stands Up For Namesake Rule (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002305581

What doesn't fit a certain narrative is ignored or misrepresented.

[tex-wyo-dem]

40. For every one of your examples of where...

Obama supported or enacted populist and/or progressive measures, I am pretty confident I can give you at least five examples where he propped up the old RW corporate staus quo, made it worse or simply looked the other way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm encouraged by his language and, in some cases, actions as of late, and would want nothing more than to see him succeed if he continues down this path.

[ProSense]

55. Well

For every one of your examples of where...

Obama supported or enacted populist and/or progressive measures, I am pretty confident I can give you at least five examples where he propped up the old RW corporate staus quo, made it worse or simply looked the other way.

Don't get me wrong, I'm encouraged by his language and, in some cases, actions as of late, and would want nothing more than to see him succeed if he continues down this path.

...you could try and I'm absolutely certain that for every one, I can come up with 10 more. And thanks for that bit of hyperbole.

[Fearless]

41. I said I wish they came through.

I did not say he didn't do things that were "populist" in nature at any point. I said that for all the hullabaloo and grassroots organization the day after the election tens of thousands of supporters got metaphorical pink slips and were told to go on their way. Not literally and not explicitly, but it happened nonetheless.

[grahamhgreen]

8. 30% is hardly excessive, 35% is the top bracket for those of us who work.

[spanone]

10. k&r...

[MrCoffee]

12. Sigh

I suppose OMB and the CBO, not to mention Department-level staff, were involved in creating a hopeless budget designed solely as a plank in the platform.

As long as it makes for some good political theater.

[ProSense]

13. So

Sigh

I suppose OMB and the CBO, not to mention Department-level staff, were involved in creating a hopeless budget designed solely as a plank in the platform.

As long as it makes for some good political theater.

...you're upset the budget is good?

Factbox: Obama seeks higher taxes on big business
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002306556

[MrCoffee]

14. Who is it good for?

I'm upset that it's a fake budget. It could strip funding to the DoD so that they have to sell bombers for scrap and fund DoE through the stratosphere, but so what?

It's good for the campaign, and that's it.

[ProSense]

15. What's

Who is it good for?

I'm upset that it's a fake budget. It could strip funding to the DoD so that they have to sell bombers for scrap and fund DoE through the stratosphere, but so what?

It's good for the campaign, and that's it.

..."fake" about it? You seem to prefer a more watered down budget that can pass the Republican House, but you're advocating "fake" defense cuts. Remember, defense cuts were already announced. It's not just "good for the campaign," it's good for America.

[MrCoffee]

16. From your own source

"At this point, it's all about setting the media narrative"

"populist proposals central to his re-election campaign"

"with little chance that Congress will enact the agenda, and many of the included proposals already rejected, the presentation will be largely a moment of political theater aimed at projecting an image of the president as a 'warrior for the middle class.'"

"But, you know, because Republicans will reject all of these much-needed and generally popular measures, it's 'political theater.'"

The infrastructure and repeal of the Bush tax cuts are among the rejected proposals.

[ProSense]

17. Maybe

"At this point, it's all about setting the media narrative"

"populist proposals central to his re-election campaign"

"with little chance that Congress will enact the agenda, and many of the included proposals already rejected, the presentation will be largely a moment of political theater aimed at projecting an image of the president as a 'warrior for the middle class.'"

"But, you know, because Republicans will reject all of these much-needed and generally popular measures, it's 'political theater.'"

The infrastructure and repeal of the Bush tax cuts are among the rejected proposals.

...you can contact the President to present a budget that isn't "fake." Ask him to remove the "infrastructure and repeal of the Bush tax cuts" to make it more real.

There is "little chance" of Congress doing anything. That's not unexpected. It hasn't done much of anything, which is why its approval rating is 11 percent.

[MrCoffee]

21. Maybe

[dionysus]

26. well, you get to be mad at obama whatever what happens, so you should be happy.

[Demstud]

44. Any "real" budget with a hope of passing the house would be unpalatable

The fact is, with a Republican party desperate to please their corporate money men and social conservatives during an election year nothing reasonable is going to get past the house.

[CAPHAVOC]

37. Borrowing 45% of every dollar spent.

Well. I guess why not double the fun and spent Two Trillion. Think of it. I guess this will work. We can borrow a Trillion today and pay it back by some cuts over ten years. Sounds good to me. If there are any suckers who will loan the money why not?

[ProSense]

45. As

Borrowing 45% of every dollar spent.

Well. I guess why not double the fun and spent Two Trillion. Think of it. I guess this will work. We can borrow a Trillion today and pay it back by some cuts over ten years. Sounds good to me. If there are any suckers who will loan the money why not?

...far as I'm concerned, spend whatever it takes to speed the recovery. That's the best way to lessen the damage to the economy. Then in a healthy economy, with an appropriate stream of revenue, the debt can be paid down rapidly. I mean, remember when there were surpluses?

[CAPHAVOC]

53. Me too.

This spending and taxing fight is absurd. Arguing over birth control pills and a couple points of income tax. Disgusting.

[Scootaloo]

22. Obama is incapable of ever being "good enough" for some people

They hold him to this immense standard that has never existed for any of the previous forty-three presidents. If he comes close to meeting those goals, then those goals are moved to ensure he still fails to be good enough. When he fails, these people heap scorn and hatred and invective upon him and anyone - everyone - who still supports him; "Obamabots" and such. When he achieves, it's ignored or derided for being, again, "not good enough."

As a student of history, I'm pretty sure I've seen this attitude before.

[ProSense]

23. I think

Obama is incapable of ever being "good enough" for some people

They hold him to this immense standard that has never existed for any of the previous forty-three presidents. If he comes close to meeting those goals, then those goals are moved to ensure he still fails to be good enough. When he fails, these people heap scorn and hatred and invective upon him and anyone - everyone - who still supports him; "Obamabots" and such. When he achieves, it's ignored or derided for being, again, "not good enough."

As a student of history, I'm pretty sure I've seen this attitude before.

...you misread the comment: It's basically arguing that the budget is too good, which makes it "fake." Read the entire subthread.

Fascinating stuff!

[Scootaloo]

24. No, I got that

I came off with the impression that ANY idea or policy or idea will result in MrCoffee panning it, provided Barack H. Obama is involved somewhere. It's not - as is often claimed - "criticism of his policies," it's simple antipathy towards the man's existence and place in the White House.

[MrCoffee]

25. You got the wrong impression.

[Scootaloo]

27. I haven't seen anything to say otherwise yet.

So far your position consists of criticizing Obama because it's a good, ambitious plan.

Of course, despite being too ambitious (and thus "fake&quot it's also not ambitious enough, because it doesn't also encompass what you want it to, so you bang him for that, too.

How do you like that? Fuck Obama, his plan is too good and also not good enough.

So, no. I don't think I've got the wrong impression of your position, MrCoffee.

[TNLib]

28. Awesome I hope it holds

[JNelson6563]

31. We need to pound them mercilessly

until they pass it.

Julie

[Bonobo]

32. That's what is ALWAYS done before elections. As predictable as the sun. nt

[ProSense]

33. Except

"That's what is ALWAYS done before elections. As predictable as the sun."

...for the Buffet rule and few other items, most of proposals were in last year's budget. In fact, ending the oil subsidies and corporate loopholes have been in all the budgets. The inclusion of the Buffet rule and the additional stimulus strengthens the current budget's populist appeal. Maybe there will be impetus for Congress to act given the Occupy movement. One can hope.

[Scurrilous]

34. K & R

[Skraxx]

35. His landslide win will be his mandate to enact this budget

Which is why we must give him the congress he needs to get it done.

[Mkap]

36. Of course they are opposed

and the GOP will be against it. And their reason being cause millionaires worked hard so they deserve tax breaks as if to suggest anyone making less then six figures is a lazy ass. It's disgusting that GOP thinks that just because some people have money they get to take advantage of tax loop holes or avoid paying altogether as if they have more constitutional rights then the average america cause they make more

[a2liberal]

38. Easy to do when you know

that it has no chance of passing. Not going to see it when they'd have no excuse for not passing it. Win-win... keep corporate overlords happy while throwing a fake bone to the base.

[ProSense]

43. Here's

"Easy to do when you know that it has no chance of passing. Not going to see it when they'd have no excuse for not passing it. Win-win... keep corporate overlords happy while throwing a fake bone to the base."

...my question: On the budget, why does Congress get a pass?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002307808

[a2liberal]

48. People expect that behavior from Republicans

Corporatism is part of their brand and they're at least honest about it. A large number of supposed Democrats work towards the same goals while putting on a more liberal face.

[jtown1123]

46. Are we all conveniently ignoring its Medicare cuts that wld affect the middle class

that is something I cannot support...

[ProSense]

50. What

"Are we all conveniently ignoring its Medicare cuts that wld affect the middle class"

...Medicare cuts?

Drugmaker Rebates Would Rise $156B in Obama Budget

By Alex Wayne

President Barack Obama’s budget plan would trim spending on federal health programs at the expense of drugmakers, hospitals and nursing homes while seeking nearly $1 billion for carrying out the 2010 health-care law.

The fiscal 2013 blueprint, released yesterday, contains a package of changes to Medicare, the U.S. health insurance program for the elderly and disabled, and Medicaid, the health plan for the poor that would help save $362 billion over a decade to slow medical spending.

Drug companies led by Pfizer Inc. (PFE) would have to provide $156 billion in discounts over the next decade for medicines sold to low-income senior citizens, on top of $80 billion in discounts and rebates the industry agreed to help fund the cost of the health-care overhaul.

<...>

Under Obama’s budget, Medicare spending would increase by $45 billion in fiscal 2013, to $523 billion. The administration proposed raising premiums on wealthier senior citizens beginning in 2017 to save $28 billion through 2022. The budget also would cut payments to long-term care hospitals such as those run by Kindred Healthcare Inc. (KND) and to nursing homes, saving about $63 billion over a decade.

- more -

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-13/drugmaker-rebates-would-rise-by-156-billion-over-10-years-in-obama-budget.html

[jtown1123]

59. What about Medicare Means Testing? That will affect the middle class, not the wealthy:

There are some incredibly complex formulas in the budget on this...the short and simple of it is that means testing is in there. This may sound progressive, but the reality of the incomes of those on Medicare means that means testing will cut benefits all the way down to folks who made in the mid 40's: http://www.ncpssm.org/entitledtoknow/?p=2188

[ProSense]

60. It's

What about Medicare Means Testing? That will affect the middle class, not the wealthy:

There are some incredibly complex formulas in the budget on this...the short and simple of it is that means testing is in there. This may sound progressive, but the reality of the incomes of those on Medicare means that means testing will cut benefits all the way down to folks who made in the mid 40's: http://www.ncpssm.org/entitledtoknow/?p=2188

...an increase in premiums on higher incomes:

“While some tout increasing means testing in Medicare as a way to insure ‘rich’ seniors pay their share, the truth is, the middle-class will take this hit too. Medicare has already been means tested since 2007 and the number of beneficiaries subject to higher premiums is already increasing. Proposals that target even more Medicare beneficiaries for increasing premiums will ultimately impact beneficiaries with modest incomes.” Max Richtman, President and CEO

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I see nothing in the Kaiser piece linked to that supports the "middle class" claim or the $47,000 threshold.

[jtown1123]

61. Here this might help:

From Kaiser:
The income thresholds for the higher income Part B and D premiums in
2035 are equivalent to about $47,000 for individuals and $94,000 for couples in today’s inflation-adjusted dollars.

http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8276.pdf

25% of Medicare beneficiaries fit the above definition of "higher income." Since so few seniors are traditionally wealthy, they would have to dip down to this 25% threshold to produce any meaningful savings from means testing, which is incredibly problematic. Medicare has no income tax cap, unlike Social Security, so these people have been contributing the max amount to Medicare their entire lives, then they cut their benefits, which doesn't seem fair. Medicare is already means tested on top of all this. I don't think we should keep tapping seniors like an ATM every time we need more revenue.

Obviously, this budget is not going to be passed, but I wanted to make the point that means testing Medicare is not the answer to our debt and deficit issues. We need to continue the ACA and keep building on ways to keep the costs of all health care down.

[ProSense]

62. Thanks. So

From Kaiser:
The income thresholds for the higher income Part B and D premiums in
2035 are equivalent to about $47,000 for individuals and $94,000 for couples in today’s inflation-adjusted dollars.

http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/8276.pdf

25% of Medicare beneficiaries fit the above definition of "higher income." Since so few seniors are traditionally wealthy, they would have to dip down to this 25% threshold to produce any meaningful savings from means testing, which is incredibly problematic. Medicare has no income tax cap, unlike Social Security, so these people have been contributing the max amount to Medicare their entire lives, then they cut their benefits, which doesn't seem fair. Medicare is already means tested on top of all this. I don't think we should keep tapping seniors like an ATM every time we need more revenue.

Obviously, this budget is not going to be passed, but I wanted to make the point that means testing Medicare is not the answer to our debt and deficit issues. We need to continue the ACA and keep building on ways to keep the costs of all health care down.

...it's a hypothetical base on inflation over the next two decades? Is there any reason to believe the thresholds aren't going to be adjusted accordingly?

[jtown1123]

63. I would hope they would. But my concern is we're means testing people who have very little

little to give. We'll see. I'm just worried Medicare means testing always seems to be the go to solution when it comes to finding savings in Medicare. Why not announce public support for allowing part D to negotiate on drug prices like the VA? That would save billions.

[Romulox]

47. Still waiting for us to renegotiate NAFTA!

[woo me with science]

57. And fix the Patriot Act.

and fix the health insurance plan.

And imagine the money they could save by not going ahead with this "30,000 drones over US skies" plan.

Or the plan for a 24/7 surveillance camera system over large areas of New York City.

Or the internet ID pilot plans they are starting now.