President Obama has put forward a budget that includes cuts to Social Security in the hopes of getting a grand budget bargain with Congressional Republicans. The goal was to show seriousness in cutting entitlements in order to get Republicans to show seriousness in raising revenue. Republicans have already panned it, liberals are not happy, and the end result is, well, more of the same. So what was the goal here?
The most likely explanation is that Obama really, really wants a budget deal. The charitable explanation is that he believes that once there is a deal, Republicans will stop harping about the deficit, taxes, etc. I think that has a probability of less than zero, but there are true believers in the world and he may be one of them. The other explanation is that he knew this would be rejected and would simply make the Republican insistence on no new taxes ever look even worse in the public’s mind. Whether or not this was his intention, it appears to be the current outcome.
Frankly, I think that negotiating with yourself in this manner is far too risky, since there was always the chance that this deal would happen. A small chance, but a chance nonetheless. In reality, what we probably need to do is expand Social Security and Medicare, not cut them. Cutting them gives you the penny-wise, pound-foolish outcome of poorer seniors who can’t retire and spend more money on expensive private health insurance. Not to mention the fact that Republicans will use his offer to claim in 2014 that “Democrats want to cut your Social Security”. Mark my words, it will happen.
One thing that I have learned in years of politics is that Democrats really, really want to get along and do the objectively right thing. While this earnestness can be endearing in some situations, when you are negotiating your core beliefs you have to know when you can compromise, and when you need to let your unreasonable opponents take the fall. Sadly, few elected Democrats take this lesson to heart.