The Democratic Party internal debate about what to do in order to come back in 2012 rages on and will for a while. The issues and strategic implications are complicated. There are a lot of big and small tactical considerations. The potential paths that could be followed go a lot of different directions. But here’s one thing I feel extremely confident in saying: the path for Obama’s political comeback does not lie in walking over the backs of senior citizens and the working class.
Voters over 65 years old were the one age group that went clearly against Obama in the 2008 victory, but it got a lot worse in 2010: the margin against Democrats ballooned to 22 points in this election, after being -8 in 2008. And working class voters in their 40s, 50s, and 60s- the folks getting ready to go on Social Security and Medicare- turned strongly against the Democrats as well. The economy was a big part of that, of course, but so was a few hundred million dollars worth of false ads about Democrats cutting Medicare.
Fresh off that delightful experience, Erskine Bowles wants President Obama to embrace raising the retirement age for Social Security and Medicare to 69, and cutting benefits to boot. I’m trying to think of what the best way to describe this as a political strategy. Let’s see- thinking, thinking, begins with S…Oh yes, I remember now: the word would be Suicide. And yes, that would be with a capital S.
Senior citizens are not the cause of our deficit problems. Neither is hard working Americans in their 40s and 50s paying into the system every month so they can look forward to having some way to stay out of poverty when they get older. We have the deficit problems we have because of tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires passed in 2001, because of agribusiness and other corporate subsidies, because of defense and other government contractors gaming and the system and ripping off taxpayers, and because of Wall St speculators who crashed our economy and then came begging for a bailout. That’s who the deficit commission should be going after, not Grandma and Grandpa.
President Obama should distance himself quickly and decisively from this “Chairmen’s Mark”. The distance he should put between it and him would be about the distance between earth and Jupiter, and that may not be enough. Obama needs a lot less Erskine and a lot more Elizabeth (as in Warren): in other words, Obama needs people around him who argue passionately on behalf of middle class interests, and can explain policy in ways middle class folks can get. His new chief of the National Economic Council should be someone who has argued strongly against Social Security cuts, and argued strongly for an economic strategy that aggressively promotes new manufacturing and infrastructure jobs for the middle class. The new White House staffers brought in should be the same: people known for their passion in fighting on behalf of working people and seniors living on Social Security.
This issue is actually a lot like the foreclosure crisis- a mushy response is a big political problem, but a strong, decisive, pro-middle class response would be great for Obama. The Deficit Commission Chairmen’s Mark could be either a curse or an opportunity. It all depends on how the President handles it. If he is mushy in his approach, this awful report becomes his to own. If he makes it clear that he is strongly rejecting these bad ideas, and is moving to champion the interests of the middle class, he becomes a hero- to senior citizens, to working class voters, and to his base.
