Obama suddenly rediscovers his deficit commission
posted at 10:55 am on April 12, 2011 by Ed Morrissey
Old and busted: “a framework for a conversation.” New hotness: Deficit commission plans as policy. In his sudden desire to play defense against Rep. Paul Ryan and avoid the leadership vacuum that has plagued the White House on budgets and deficits, Obama has reached into his wastebasket to breathe new life into a plan that his team dismissed in February as merely a conversation piece:
President Obama plans this week to respond to a Republican blueprint for tackling the soaring national debt by promoting a bipartisan approach pioneered by an independent presidential commission rather than introducing his own detailed plan.
Obama will not blaze a fresh path when he delivers a much-anticipated speech Wednesday afternoon at George Washington University. Instead, he is expected to offer support for the commission’s work and a related effort underway in the Senate to develop a strategy for curbing borrowing. Obama will frame the approach as a responsible alternative to the 2012 plan unveiled last week by House Republicans, according to people briefed by the White House.
Letting others take the lead on complex problems has become a hallmark of the Obama presidency. On health care, last year’s tax deal and the recent battle over 2011 spending cuts, Obama has repeatedlywaited as others set the parameters of the debate, swooping in late to cut a deal. The tactic has produced significant victories but exposed Obama to criticism that he has shown a lack of leadership.
That’s a polite way of saying that this President doesn’t seem terribly interested in policy or hard work. Obama could have grabbed the mantle of deficit reform by using the commission’s report to build his FY2012 budget request. After all, the Simpson-Bowles panel was his creation. Instead, Obama offered the usual spend-and-spend-some-more budget two months ago and junked the commission report, drawing derision even from his supporters in the national media.
Falling back to Simpson-Bowles makes sense for Obama in some ways. It has more bipartisan heft, for one thing, than his earlier plan, which had almost no credibility at all. Having ceded the initiative to Ryan, Obama needs to find a way to start looking like a leader again, and the Simpson-Bowles plan has some good ideas in it — some of which are in Ryan’s plan, too. He needs more political cover for tax increases he’ll propose, and Obama doesn’t want to stand alone on that platform with a re-election campaign starting.
Having said all that, it doesn’t exactly look like leadership to fish a report out of the trash and call it a new idea. If Obama thinks that Simpson-Bowles was so terrific, why did he round-file it two months ago and issue a budget request that almost entirely refuted it? And why should anyone believe he’d stick with the cuts Simpson-Bowles demands after giving it that vote of no confidence in February?
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2