Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2013, 08:10 AM  
mlyonsd mlyonsd is online now
Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Spink, SD
Casino cash: $6582
Woodward: Obama moved the goal posts in sequester deal

Obama’s sequester deal-changer

By Bob Woodward,

Bob Woodward (woodwardb@washpost.com) is an associate editor of The Post. His latest book is “The Price of Politics.” Evelyn M. Duffy contributed to this column.

Misunderstanding, misstatements and all the classic contortions of partisan message management surround the sequester, the term for the $85 billion in ugly and largely irrational federal spending cuts set by law to begin Friday.

What is the non-budget wonk to make of this? Who is responsible? What really happened?

The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”

The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.

“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”

The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.

Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid. A mandatory sequester was the only action-forcing mechanism they could devise. Nabors has said, “We didn’t actually think it would be that hard to convince them” — Reid and the Republicans — to adopt the sequester. “It really was the only thing we had. There was not a lot of other options left on the table.”

A majority of Republicans did vote for the Budget Control Act that summer, which included the sequester. Key Republican staffers said they didn’t even initially know what a sequester was — because the concept stemmed from the budget wars of the 1980s, when they were not in government.

At the Feb. 13 Senate Finance Committee hearing on Lew’s nomination to become Treasury secretary, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) asked Lew about the account in my book: “Woodward credits you with originating the plan for sequestration. Was he right or wrong?”

“It’s a little more complicated than that,” Lew responded, “and even in his account, it was a little more complicated than that. We were in a negotiation where the failure would have meant the default of the government of the United States.”

“Did you make the suggestion?” Burr asked.

“Well, what I did was said that with all other options closed, we needed to look for an option where we could agree on how to resolve our differences. And we went back to the 1984 plan that Senator [Phil] Gramm and Senator [Warren] Rudman worked on and said that that would be a basis for having a consequence that would be so unacceptable to everyone that we would be able to get action.”

In other words, yes.

But then Burr asked about the president’s statement during the presidential debate, that the Republicans originated it.

Lew, being a good lawyer and a loyal presidential adviser, then shifted to denial mode: “Senator, the demand for an enforcement mechanism was not something that the administration was pushing at that moment.”

That statement was not accurate.

On Tuesday, Obama appeared at the White House with a group of police officers and firefighters to denounce the sequester as a “meat-cleaver approach” that would jeopardize military readiness and investments in education, energy and readiness. He also said it would cost jobs. But, the president said, the substitute would have to include new revenue through tax reform.

At noon that same day, White House press secretary Jay Carney shifted position and accepted sequester paternity.

“The sequester was something that was discussed,” Carney said. Walking back the earlier statements, he added carefully, “and as has been reported, it was an idea that the White House put forward.”

This was an acknowledgment that the president and Lew had been wrong.

Why does this matter?

First, months of White House dissembling further eroded any semblance of trust between Obama and congressional Republicans. (The Republicans are by no means blameless and have had their own episodes of denial and bald-faced message management.)

Second, Lew testified during his confirmation hearing that the Republicans would not go along with new revenue in the portion of the deficit-reduction plan that became the sequester. Reinforcing Lew’s point, a senior White House official said Friday, “The sequester was an option we were forced to take because the Republicans would not do tax increases.”

In fact, the final deal reached between Vice President Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in 2011 included an agreement that there would be no tax increases in the sequester in exchange for what the president was insisting on: an agreement that the nation’s debt ceiling would be increased for 18 months, so Obama would not have to go through another such negotiation in 2012, when he was running for reelection.

So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts. His call for a balanced approach is reasonable, and he makes a strong case that those in the top income brackets could and should pay more. But that was not the deal he made.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...0da_story.html

Proof Obama can't be trusted. Republicans are right to be wary when making any deal with him.
Posts: 25,090
mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.mlyonsd is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 08:15 AM   #2
BigRedChief BigRedChief is offline
Brainwashed
 
BigRedChief's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Swims with fishes
Casino cash: $7707
VARSITY
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlyonsd View Post
Proof Obama can't be trusted. Republicans are right to be wary when making any deal with him.
I'm going to keep this in my clipboard so every time you bring up that Republicans are the sensible ones ready to negotiate.

uh facts are getting in the way of your argument points. It was the Republicans that never negotiated in good faith. The re-election of Obama means to me that Obama wasn't the obstructionist. Or why did they re-elect him?

  • The historical obstructionism of the opposing party was unprecedented.
  • More filibusters than ever was even dreamed of by the opposing party. Obama had to have 60 votes to pass anything.
  • It started from day one. The Senate majority leader publicly declared that the #1 goal was to make Obama a one term president.
  • On inauguration night top Republicans got together in a steakhouse and conspired to obstruct every single issue or proposal that Obama wanted. And then over the 4 years they carried out that plan.
  • He proposed legislation in the exact same form as previous Republican legislators had proposed. Same exact proposal as the Republican. But now they not only opposed their own ideas and proposals but filibuster the proposal.
__________________
People who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.

Issac Asimov
Posts: 43,168
BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.BigRedChief is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 09:39 AM   #3
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief View Post
I'm going to keep this in my clipboard so every time you bring up that Republicans are the sensible ones ready to negotiate.

uh facts are getting in the way of your argument points. It was the Republicans that never negotiated in good faith. The re-election of Obama means to me that Obama wasn't the obstructionist. Or why did they re-elect him?

  • The historical obstructionism of the opposing party was unprecedented.
  • More filibusters than ever was even dreamed of by the opposing party. Obama had to have 60 votes to pass anything.
  • It started from day one. The Senate majority leader publicly declared that the #1 goal was to make Obama a one term president.
  • On inauguration night top Republicans got together in a steakhouse and conspired to obstruct every single issue or proposal that Obama wanted. And then over the 4 years they carried out that plan.
  • He proposed legislation in the exact same form as previous Republican legislators had proposed. Same exact proposal as the Republican. But now they not only opposed their own ideas and proposals but filibuster the proposal.
Trying to change the subject?
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 09:54 AM   #4
Prison Bitch Prison Bitch is offline
The Bitch is back
 
Prison Bitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lees summit
Casino cash: $10049
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief View Post
[*] On inauguration night top Republicans got together in a steakhouse and conspired to obstruct every single issue or proposal that Obama wanted. And then over the 4 years they carried out that plan.
Which is exactly what I sent them there to do.
Posts: 13,881
Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.Prison Bitch is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:02 AM   #5
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch View Post
Which is exactly what I sent them there to do.
They were meeting in a steakhouse because they were unwelcome in any of the planning meetings for what the filibuster-proof democrat majority was going to do to us.
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:03 AM   #6
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedChief View Post
I'm going to keep this in my clipboard so every time you bring up that Republicans are the sensible ones ready to negotiate.

uh facts are getting in the way of your argument points. It was the Republicans that never negotiated in good faith. The re-election of Obama means to me that Obama wasn't the obstructionist. Or why did they re-elect him?

  • The historical obstructionism of the opposing party was unprecedented.
  • More filibusters than ever was even dreamed of by the opposing party. Obama had to have 60 votes to pass anything.
  • It started from day one. The Senate majority leader publicly declared that the #1 goal was to make Obama a one term president.
  • On inauguration night top Republicans got together in a steakhouse and conspired to obstruct every single issue or proposal that Obama wanted. And then over the 4 years they carried out that plan.
  • He proposed legislation in the exact same form as previous Republican legislators had proposed. Same exact proposal as the Republican. But now they not only opposed their own ideas and proposals but filibuster the proposal.
Harry Reid? Good for him!
__________________


"I'll see you guys in New York." ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi to US military personnel upon his release from US custody at Camp Bucca in Iraq during Obama's first year in office.
Posts: 75,744
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 06:27 AM   #7
Velvet_Jones Velvet_Jones is offline
Absofreakinlutely
 
Velvet_Jones's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sweet Fancy Moses!
Casino cash: $5005
My how views have changed since George W was in office. The Dems did the same thing or worse. Get over it BRC.
Posts: 2,348
Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.Velvet_Jones must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 06:47 AM   #8
Cave Johnson Cave Johnson is offline
Andy the Big Reid Coach
 
Cave Johnson's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: E. Bumf***istan
Casino cash: $6455
Goalpost moving is the natural result of November's electoral win.

Somehow, this shocks ****ing Bob Woodward.
Posts: 9,881
Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Cave Johnson is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 10:21 AM   #9
BigMeatballDave BigMeatballDave is offline
That's a spicy meatball!
 
BigMeatballDave's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2000
Casino cash: $7925
Posts: 51,024
BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.BigMeatballDave has enough rep power to blowy ou to bits.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:33 PM.


This is a test for a client's site.
A new website that shows member-created construction site listings that need fill or have excess fill. Dirt Monkey @ https://DirtMonkey.net
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.