Whitehouse leading fight to avert cuts in benefits
Link to Article
The Providence Journal
WASHINGTON — In the high-stakes debate over cutting the nation's debt, it's hard to know how much clout the Democratic left has wielded because so much of the drama has played out on the Republican right.
House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio may have closed the book on his hopes for a big bipartisan deal with President Obama to cut the deficit when he announced last weekend that his Republican colleagues remain opposed to any tax increases.
If the tax-hikes-for-benefits-cuts swap is indeed dead, liberal Democrats may never be tested on their willingness or ability to block a proposal so tied to Mr. Obama's efforts to forge bipartisan compromise on an issue vital to the nation's economic standing –– and his reelection prospects.
But as the sub-plot thickened on the Democratic side of the stage, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse was among the activists getting attention for their sharp opposition to the idea of a deficit deal based partly on cuts in such huge and costly entitlement programs as Social Security and Medicare.
During a conference call with reporters last week, the Rhode Island Democrat declared that Democratic support couldn't be taken for granted if Mr. Obama "capitulated" to demands for savings from entitlements.
Added Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the leader of the Defending Social Security Caucus in the Senate: some Democrats won't vote for "a piece of crap which really comes down heavy on working families, and the elderly, and the sick, and the children."
"There is deep division in the Democratic Party between those who want no change and those who realize change is necessary," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, a conservative Republican from Alabama who sits on the Senate Budget Committee with Whitehouse. "So those voices on either side that are aggressive and outspoken can make a difference on how that caucus decides."
Whitehouse and his allies have been nothing if not aggressive.
Whitehouse said in an interview Monday that he became a charter member of the Sanders Social Security caucus early this year, at a moment when "there was clearly going to be a big pivot toward deficit reduction" and entitlement programs were "a likely target for the Republicans. We wanted to begin to build defenses against that early on."
Also in the political backdrop: Democrats had just suffered stinging losses to the GOP in the 2010 elections. An immediate result was an Obama compromise –– or capitulation, to some on the left –– that allowed the Bush-era tax cuts to be extended for two more years.
Whitehouse said Sanders and his colleagues selected Social Security as the marquee policy issue for Democrats to flag –– rather than entitlements more generally –– partly to "keep it simple." Further, he said, blocking reductions in Social Security would "appeal to a broader group of senators" than a comparable effort on Medicare.
Whitehouse said the six charter members set about "an early and energetic defense" of Social Security. In the politics of the Senate, Whitehouse said, "the two things that give you weight are numbers and consistency," so the successful pursuit of influence on policy entails sticking to an issue and organizing colleagues to take up the cause.
Whitehouse would not speculate on whether he and his colleagues had the numbers to block any reductions in Social Security –– should such a proposal emerge in a deficit-reduction deal. But his office said the Sanders caucus has more than doubled in size to 14 senators. The current membership, which includes Sen. Jack Reed, is all-Democratic (except for independent Sanders) and solidly liberal.
Barry Hinckley, the Republican challenger for Whitehouse's seat, said the senator is correct to argue that Social Security changes should not be part of the debate over deficit reduction.
But Hinckley said Whitehouse is "demagoguing" the issue by attacking those in both parties –– including the president –– who want to save the program. Changes in it are necessary, Hinckley said, because people are living longer and a rapidly growing elderly population is becoming eligible for benefits financed by too few workers.
During last week's telephone call with reporters, Whitehouse put in some plugs for his reelection campaign website, where he asks voters to sign a petition calling upon the president to take Social Security off the table.
Tuesday, Whitehouse told supporters in a campaign e-mail that during the president's Monday news conference, "President Obama once again raised the possibility of ‘trimming benefits' for Social Security and Medicare as part of the budget deal … ." The senator urged his correspondents in the interactive note to sign on as "citizen co-sponsors" of a new piece of legislation he has introduced to discourage cuts in Social Security and Medicare.
Whitehouse acknowledged that he has used some strong language against his president, the leader of the Democratic Party. "I can be pretty forceful," Whitehouse said, in protecting what he views as the interests of Rhode Islanders, "and if that means I have to be forceful with the president of my own party on a subject, I'm prepared to do that."
WASHINGTON — In the high-stakes debate over cutting the nation's debt, it's hard to know how much clout the Democratic left has wielded because so much of the drama has played out on the Republican right.
House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio may have closed the book on his hopes for a big bipartisan deal with President Obama to cut the deficit when he announced last weekend that his Republican colleagues remain opposed to any tax increases.
If the tax-hikes-for-benefits-cuts swap is indeed dead, liberal Democrats may never be tested on their willingness or ability to block a proposal so tied to Mr. Obama's efforts to forge bipartisan compromise on an issue vital to the nation's economic standing –– and his reelection prospects.
But as the sub-plot thickened on the Democratic side of the stage, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse was among the activists getting attention for their sharp opposition to the idea of a deficit deal based partly on cuts in such huge and costly entitlement programs as Social Security and Medicare.
During a conference call with reporters last week, the Rhode Island Democrat declared that Democratic support couldn't be taken for granted if Mr. Obama "capitulated" to demands for savings from entitlements.
Added Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the leader of the Defending Social Security Caucus in the Senate: some Democrats won't vote for "a piece of crap which really comes down heavy on working families, and the elderly, and the sick, and the children."
"There is deep division in the Democratic Party between those who want no change and those who realize change is necessary," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, a conservative Republican from Alabama who sits on the Senate Budget Committee with Whitehouse. "So those voices on either side that are aggressive and outspoken can make a difference on how that caucus decides."
Whitehouse and his allies have been nothing if not aggressive.
Whitehouse said in an interview Monday that he became a charter member of the Sanders Social Security caucus early this year, at a moment when "there was clearly going to be a big pivot toward deficit reduction" and entitlement programs were "a likely target for the Republicans. We wanted to begin to build defenses against that early on."
Also in the political backdrop: Democrats had just suffered stinging losses to the GOP in the 2010 elections. An immediate result was an Obama compromise –– or capitulation, to some on the left –– that allowed the Bush-era tax cuts to be extended for two more years...
Continue reading...