Image 01

Posts Tagged ‘flip flop’

Obama Flip Flops, OK’s “Unpopular Deal-Sweetening Measures” To Buy Obamacare Votes

Monday, March 15th, 2010

President Barack Obama Flip Flopped on the backroom, special interest deals in Obamacare, now allowing them to remain in the legislation in the hopes of buying Congressional votes and toasting the passage of Obamacare within a week

President Barack Obama has flip flopped today, embracing the kind of backroom deals he campaigned against in 2008 and even recently condemned in the Senate health care package, as he heads to Ohio to begin the final push to gain passage of his massive comprehensive health care reform plan known as Obamacare.  The fact that Obama has decided to accept these unpopular, backroom special interest deals at this critical moment regarding the signature initiative of his Presidency could come to define the Obama brand for years to come.  Indeed, Specific pork in the Obamacare package intended to purchase votes, such as those of Dem. Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Dem. Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CN) and Dem. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), will now remain in the final Obamacare package to be voted upon by the House of Representatives this week:

WASHINGTON – Still seeking votes for his proposed health care overhaul, President Barack Obama appears ready to reverse his position and allow unpopular deal-sweetening measures in the hopes of finding Democratic support for legislation whose future will be decided in coming days.

Taking a new position, Axelrod said the White House only objects to state-specific arrangements, such as an increase in Medicaid funding for Nebraska, ridiculed as the “Cornhusker Kickback.” That’s being cut, but provisions that could affect more than one state are OK, Axelrod said.

That means deals sought by senators from Montana and Connecticut would be fine — even though Gibbs last week singled them out as items Obama wanted removed. There was resistance, however, from two committee chairman, Democratic Sens. Max Baucus of Montana and Chris Dodd of Connecticut, and the White House has apparently backed down.

It appears that the claims of White House spokesman Robert Gibbs regarding the need to remove the special pork-laden deals for individual Democratic senators were designed solely to win a news cycle from the compliant establishment media, not actually improve the Obamacare legislation by removing such backroom deals. At the end of the day, the only change to the 100’s of pages of special interest pork in Obamacare to be made is the extension of the special Medicare deal for Nebraska, known as the “Cornhusker Kickback”, to all states, which, of course, will increase the amount of federal deficit spending that will result if Obamacare passes.

In Ohio, instead of focusing on the substance of the Obamacare legislation, or the special backroom deals he allegedly wants to remove from same, President Obama will focus on the individual story of Natoma Canfield and try to use that person’s misfortune to sell his policies to America:

Meanwhile, the White House tried to increase public pressure on Congress to pass the legislation. Obama planned to visit Strongsville, Ohio, home of cancer patient Natoma Canfield, who wrote the president she gave up her health insurance after it rose to $8,500 a year. Obama repeatedly has cited that letter from a self-employed cleaning worker who lives in the Cleveland suburb to illustrate the urgency of the massive overhaul.

Canfield’s sister, Connie Anderson, was scheduled to introduce Obama at that event.

This use of individual anecdote was the same strategy employed by Obama and the Democrats at the health care summit a few weeks ago, and the benefit of this strategy is to allow Obama to make an emotional appeal without focusing too much on the quite ugly realities of the legislative language itself (such as the payoffs to Baucus and Dodd) and the even ugilier realities of the procedural trickery to be used by Democrats this week in the House (“Slaughter Solution”) and the Senate (reconciliation).

Politico confirmed just now that the “Slaughter Solution” is now being pushed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for use on the Obamacare package to allow the House to “deem” the bill passed without actually voting on it:

The so-called solution, named for House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), would “deem” the Senate bill passed if House Democrats approve a package of fixes.

In other words, House members wouldn’t have to formally cast a vote on a bill that most of them don’t want to defend on the campaign trail — but it would pass anyway.

The speaker told her rank and file Friday that the decision was still up in the air but she thought this was the way most of her members wanted to handle the Senate bill.

The Newsweek article by David Stone from Friday, March 12, 2010 which strongly condemned any move to use the “Slaughter Solution”, excerpted by CentristNet here, has now been pulled from Newsweek’s site, clearly indicating that the establishment media is circling the wagons and set to push the “Slaughter Solution” over the finish line. Indeed, the talking points released by Democrats on Friday refer to such issues as the arguably unconstitutional “Slaughter Solution” and the use of reconciliation in the Senate as “inside baseball” and not worthy of discussion with the public. Considering Obama is starting the week by flip flopping on the sweetheart, backroom deals in Obamacare, whether the public catches on to the unprecedented procedural trickery planned in the House and Senate could determine the fate of the bill.

UPDATE: Ed at Hotair points out that the Democrats have now unveiled their 2300 page “Shell bill”, a copy of which can be found here, to start the process of the “Slaughter Solution”:

According to Heritage and Philip Klein, this is a shell bill, not the actual proposed reconciliation bill. It’s a copy of the version from last autumn. Later this week, the House will gut this version and replace it with their new ObamaCare fixes. However, the student loan nationalization will remain in the bill, so it’s not entirely old hat.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Rescue not Bailout?

Wednesday, October 1st, 2008

DC Rescues the World Tonight

DC "Rescues" the World Tonight

As the clock winds down to tonight’s vote in the Senate on the latest incarnation of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s request for authority to purchase up to $700,000,000,000.00 in “toxic” mortgage securities, a substantial shift has occurred in the language describing Paulson’s request. No longer do McCain, Obama, congressional leaders or President Bush refer to the “bailout”. Now, the legislation set for a vote tonight in the Senate is referred to by the aforementioned politicians and the media as a “rescue” instead.

The rhetorical shift comes at a critical time, about two days after Monday’s surprising bipartisan defeat of the bailout package in the House of Representatives. As the strong public outcry against and subsequent defeat of the unpopular “bailout” in the House demonstrates, the term bailout has negative connotations with the American public. This is especially so because the receipients of the $700 Billion will indisputably be mainly large financial institutions, in exchange for the “toxic’ mortgage securities and perhaps the loans themselves. Calls, emails and letters continue to come in from Americans strongly against passage at a clip of 10-1 against at least.

Both parties and presidential candidates appear to be wary of being strongly associated with a bailout, hence the shift in rhetoric. “Rescue” conjures up images of heros coming to the aid of a distressed victim. Both Obama and McCain exclusively used the rescue term today’s speeches, and neither directly attacked the other today. Perhaps the candidates have implicitly (or explicitly behind the scenes?) agreed to a brief truce in order to move the “rescue” through Congress this week. However, the basic thrust of the package remains the same: providing the Treasury Department authority to borrow up to 700 Billion Dollars to purchase “toxic” mortgages securities and perhaps the loans themselves.

One key issue which is presently unclear is whether Treasury will actually try to service the loans themselves in some respect. Obama’s comments, along with other congressional Democrats, appear to signal that if Obama wins the election, the federal government will buy up the loans themselves in part and push a strong loan modification program to reduce interest rates, payment amounts and perhaps the principal amount due. The government’s ownership of millions of mortgage loans will balloon the federal government’s bureaucracy exponentially, which is no guarantee of competent, let alone sound, management.

Another key issue is one of the additions to the Senate version – a provision to lift the cap on FDIC coverage from 100,000 to 250,000. As outlined here, Obama’s annoucement at 6AM Tuesday morning is the one specific policy proposal forwarded by Obama in the last few weeks on the economic crisis. Strangely, House Democrats, as guided by Obama, rejected the inclusion of the FDIC provision when House GOP negotiator Roy Blunt argued for its inclusion on Saturday night. Amazingly, as Jim Clyburn did yesterday, Obama surrogates continue to claim credit for the FDIC proposal today on the cable media, such as Democratic Wisconsin Senator Amy Klobuchar on CNN today. The Obama campaign’s attempt to use this arguable Obama flip flop on the FDIC provision as an example of Obama’s leadership could backfire in the days to come.

The political battle afterwards about the causes of the market crisis and who’s to blame will define the presidential campaign moving through the debate period, which ends when McCain and Obama lock up for a final battle on October 15 at Hofstra University. Obama will continue to blame the incompetence and culture of deregulation brought by eight years of the Bush Administration and excesses on Wall Street. McCain will continue to blame both greed on Wall Street and “evil” in Washington, namely the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac role in creating the ponzi scheme previously known as mortgage securities.

Above all, if the bailout passes, whichever campaign controls the the media narrative about the passage of the “rescue” package will gain momentum. As McCain is struggling to keep within five points of Obama in most national polls, McCain needs to win the bailout battle to avoid a risk of seeing the race slip away to a double digit margin.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FDIC Moves for Authority to Increase 100K Cap to 250K – Obama Claims Credit

Tuesday, September 30th, 2008

Obama Claims Credit for FDIC Idea

Obama Claims Credit for FDIC Idea

Early this morning Barack Obama issued a statement on the failed bailout package which, for the first time since the crisis began, included a specific policy proposal – an increase in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) coverage limit from 100,000 to 250,000.00. Democratic surrogates quickly appeared on across the cable news dials (such as Democratic House Whip Jim Clyburn on CNN) praising Obama’s proposal and leadership in proposing this bold FDIC move. Predictably, the internet mainstream media outlets (ABC, CNN, AP) quickly seconded Obama’s FDIC proposal and praised his move as helpful to revive yesterday’s defeated bailout package. Obama’s speeches today underscored the importance of the FDIC move, stating that it would “help restore public confidence in our financial system.

An objective report, unlike the three linked above (ABC, CNN, AP) about Obama’s new FDIC proposal, cannot exclude the fact that the House GOP negotiator Roy Blunt attempted to insert the FDIC coverage hike into the compromise agreement over the weekend, and the Democratic negotiators refused. As Obama’s campaign has stated many times and Obama himself declared Sunday on Face the Nation, for “two weeks I was on the phone everyday with (Treasury) Secretary (Henry) Paulson and the congressional leaders making sure that the principles that have been ultimately adopted were incorporated into the bill” and that he was “involved in shaping” many of the bailout’s provisions.

As Obama claimed deep involvement in every day of negotiations on the bailout, it is inexplicable why Obama did not encourage Democrats to accept the FDIC cap increase proposal from GOP House negotiator Blunt. This is especially so as this morning Obama believes that the FDIC move would “boost small businesses, make our banking system more secure” and restore confidence. Furthermore, as many House conservatives were pushing for this FDIC provision, the bill may have passed yesterday if this provision had been allowed in by the Democratic negotiators.

A reverse-Kerry move may be afoot here, albeit unreported by the mainstream media and unlikely to ever be reported: Obama and the Democrats were against the FDIC coverage hike before they were for it. It has become clear in the last two weeks that the McCain campaign simply cannot compete against the Obama campaign’s shaping of the media narrative over the economic crisis, notwithstanding the difference between Obama’s claims and the reality of the situation.

Obama’s stark reversal on the FDIC cap issue amazingly won today’s news cycle by proposing an idea that he and the congressional Democrats rejected just 72 hours ago. Whether the American public notices this gigantic flip flop on the FDIC by Obama remains to be seen. Regardless, objectively speaking, Obama’s deft handling of the media during the economic crisis and McCain’s continued missteps and inability to capitalize on Obama’s mistakes demonstrates a political competency gap that may ensure Obama’s election come November 4.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama v. McCain Tonight – Election on the Line

Friday, September 26th, 2008

Obama v. McCain Tonight

Obama v. McCain Tonight

Reversing his earlier pledge to skip tonight’s debate against Barack Obama in Mississippi, John McCain announced that he will debate tonight. McCain had on Wednesday suspended campaign operations as of Thursday morning and stated he would return to DC to work on the bailout and not attend tonight’s debate if the deal was not completed. By all accounts, last night’s meeting at the White House with the candidates, congressional leaders and Bush did not finalize any bailout deal.

After the meeting last night and this morning, McCain worked on convincing House GOP members to provide some room for negotiation. Now, citing “progress” in the negotiations, McCain announced he’ll attend the debate with the following statement:

Senator McCain has spent the morning talking to members of the Administration, members of the Senate, and members of the House. He is optimistic that there has been significant progress toward a bipartisan agreement now that there is a framework for all parties to be represented in negotiations, including Representative Blunt as a designated negotiator for House Republicans. The McCain campaign is resuming all activities and the Senator will travel to the debate this afternoon. Following the debate, he will return to Washington to ensure that all voices and interests are represented in the final agreement, especially those of taxpayers and homeowners.

McCain clearly had to back off of his bravado on Wednesday to bow to political reality – a large majority of America wanted the debate to go forward – 60-22%. Obama is rightly claiming that he stood by calmly while McCain moved erratically this week. However, the results of the debate will certainly subsume overcome the short term edge to Obama.

Looking back on the past three days, that McCain has accomplished four things: 1. Taking the media’s focus off of his advisor’s ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Palin’s interview with Couric; 2. Putting Obama on the defensive and forcing him to come to the DC meeting instead of focusing on debate preparation; 3. Forcing the Democrats to sit down and listen to House GOP proposals, perhaps laying the seeds of a compromise; and 4. Increasing the stakes of tonight’s debate.

A quick review of history shows that the political environment favors the Democrats this year – only one time in modern history has a party held the White House after a two-term presidency: 1988. In 1988, Reagan was over 50% approval and the economy was not in crisis – today, Bush is at 30% approval and the economy is on the brink of potential meltdown.

The fact that McCain has seized the spotlight with his suspension gambit, while high risk, is also high reward. If McCain can seize the stage tonight, “over the head” of the media and directly to the American public, any media handringing over his tactics will melt away into a narrative of McCain strength. If he falters tonight, McCain will fall back into a significant electoral disadvantage and a feeling of inevitability may grow about an Obama victory. Tonight’s debate will be watched by many more voters than any event so far in Election 2008 – perhaps 60 million or more.

A useful “tale of the tape” summary by Politico is here. The format tonight will allow McCain and Obama room to directly confront each other. Obama’s debate negotiator, D.C. lawyer Bob Barnett, stated that the “unprecedented” structure of the debate allows for “free-form discussion” between the candidates. Centrists and independents will carefully scrutinize the nominees tonight and the tone of the last six weeks of the campaign will be set tonight. If Obama can take a perceived win or tie, his momentum will grow and McCain will be left to search for another game changing event. If McCain can win a clear perceived victory, centrist and independent voter reluctance to vote for Obama could increase and translate into a McCain lead going into the VP debate.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,