A coalition of unions has released the first set of ads pressuring Democrats on the grand bargain, with an explicit message of “Jobs Not Cuts.” The ads target some Republicans as well Democratic lawmakers in several states who have made noises in favor of a grand bargain that would cut social insurance programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and education programs.
The coalition, which is spending upwards of six figures on the ads, is made up of AFSCME, the National Education Association, and SEIU. The targets in the TV ads include Senators in Colorado, Missouri and Virginia – which includes Democrats Mark Udall, Michael Bennet, Claire McCaskill, Jim Webb and Mark Warner. The House-specific ads are radio spots, and the targets there are all Republicans – Jo Ann Emerson in Missouri, Mike Fitzpatrick and Patrick Meehan in the Philadelphia suburbs, and Don Young in Alaska.
Obviously, the days right after an election are among the worst times to exert pressure on lawmakers. But you can see this more as a signal, identifying those in the Democratic coalition most disposed to backing social insurance cuts, and pointing out that this union coalition fully plans to make them pay a price for such activities. It shows that the unions plan to keep up their outside game, though I’m sure this isn’t exactly what President Obama had in mind when he sought help on the fiscal slope negotiations. It shows that unions, for now, plan to keep an independent voice, focused on the core issue of the need for a growth strategy rather than an austerity strategy for the US in the coming years.
The tax issue has taken prevalence so far in the media, but eventually, the fiscal slope will turn to social insurance programs, and there, Democrats are divided over what they will abide:
The party is split between those who would agree to major adjustments, including increasing premiums for wealthier beneficiaries and raising Medicare’s eligibility age, and those who rule out such moves altogether. In the middle is a group that would tolerate some cuts as long as they didn’t hit beneficiaries directly [...]
The talks have just begun, and Democrats’ ultimate position on Medicare—the federal health plan for the elderly—and Medicaid—the health system for low-income people—likely will hinge on the size of any deal and what revenue increases Republicans agree to.
Obviously, this union coalition is on the “rule out” side of the divide. And they’re not afraid at this point to let those in the Democratic coalition playing footsie with cuts know that they will face a reckoning.




21 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
We need to count House Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen among
Based on his weasel behavior in this November 13 interview re-aired on C-SPAN this morning, Van Hollen was eager to feed the greed of his Wall Street Journal host & assembled CEOs in the audience who were nakedly salivating for cuts to Medicare & Medicaid. To one question about Social Security, though, Van Hollen said it must be treated “off budget” like “Simpson-Bowles did.” He made clear Social Security should not be part of reducing the deficit. But the rest of his remarks made my skin crawl.
I see, the horse has left, lets lock the barn door.
I guess now is as good as ever to start chipping at Warner though. He’s up for re election in 2014 and is a big advocate for the cuts. He’s fairly popular in the state though and that could prove troubling if groups don’t start targeting him if they want to launch an effective primary challenge(yoohoo those of you intent on changing things from the inside might want to get cracking, his approval rating is at 65%).
Funny. The Pennsylvania branch of NEA endorsed Pat Meehan. Like I said: funny.
Dick Durbin needs to be on this list. He is Obama’s cheerleader for a Grand Bargain.
That may be why they are targeting her. Since it’s a House seat she may need their help again in 2014.
The next sound you hear will be Rich Trumka folding like the empty box he is.
I think Patrick Meehan is a guy.
What they do to SSMM should not “hinge” on a damn thing. No cuts. Period. End.Of.Story.
Either way, the NEA may be firing the opening shot across the bow. They helped pull him across the finish line last time. They may be letting him know why they pulled him across that line and reminding him that if he stabs them that they won’t do so next time.
Of course, for it to be a super effective challenge they should be looking for candidates to field to challenge Meehan should he decide to support the cuts. Otherwise, he’ll likely be relying on lesser evilism to win regardless of their disagreement with him on cuts.
You know that. I know that. However, DC spends more time listening to the Diamonds, Orzags and Bloombergs then they ever will listening to you or I.
I keep hoping they’ll just let the damn cuts expire already. The world will not end no matter how many times the WSJ may state otherwise.
Absolutely. We’ve lowered the bar so much.
Surprise, surprise: the dims have no position and will only ape one after seeing which way the wind blows…
Social Security payments, next to the enormous good they do for the sick and the old, are one of the main reasons we have not had an economic meltdown (quite) as severe as the crash of 29. The meltdown of 2008 was severe and the only people to have “recovered” are the parasitic financial sector who caused most of the problem. Imagine how bad it would be right now if Social Security wasnt making payments to millions of americans, and those payments werent being spent right back into the economy within about 2 weeks of payment.
Ken burns’ “The Dustbowl” should remind eveyone that the greatest environmental catastrophe of all time, in the Americas, was not only completely man made, it was also an economic disaster. WE should then remember that the only thing standing in the way of another, possibly even worse disaster in the USDA soils management programs. Anyone who can remeber as far back as the early 70′s can remember smog. EPA regulations are the only thing preventing coporations from making the air unbreathable again.Oil and coal processing and the generation of electricity and our 3 car households produce enough emmisions to render us all unconcious or dead without regulations (to say nothing of global warming, because nothing is said, usually, anyway).
Anyone who is complaining about “big government” these days is an ignorant rube, a pathlogically selfish nihilist, or (and this is redundant) a finacial sector predator who profits from disaster and the end of the world. “Libertarianism” should be construed as a confession of crimnal insanity.
Pat Meehan is a male Republican PA07 who voted for the Ryan Budget twice. Two weeks after the election, the NEA wakes up and discovers he may not be the moderate he says he is. What a shame the chance to get rid of phony moderates like Meehan and Fitzpatrick is finished – finished like Medicare and Social Security in a recognizable form. So, thanks, PSEA.
Meehan did not rely on money from NEA and never will have to. PSEA’s endorsement permitted him to run radio ads saying he is endorsed by teachers’ unions and is therefore a moderate Republican. He just had a good Democratic challenger who never would have considered a vote to weaken SS or MC. That’s who got stabbed in the back. Once SS and MC are weakened, they aren’t coming back. The time to do something about it was November 6, 2012 – two weeks ago.
Yep. People are sorely overestimating their ability to influence corporate-owned politicians. “Ooooh! Just you wait, you Beltway rascals! We’re going to hold you accountable for your actions next time!” It’s pathetic and painful to watch.
so true! awful.
I was shocked when I saw the email about NEA and responded. It did no good. What kind of moron runs a union and doesn’t support Soc Sec and Medicare?
It ISN’T finished. It’s just put off for 2 years. I’m actually kind of surprised the NEA didn’t do everything they could to support his challenger but I don’t see how bitching about something that is already done is productive(as in the fact that they didn’t pour this particular money into his challenger). You learn and you move on.
If he had a good challenger then hopefully he’ll run again in 2014 and hopefully his team(and the rest of those so insistent on reforming the Dem party) will be smart enough to remind the NEA that not helping this guy across the finish line could have consequences.
Oh and I do agree that pressure needs to continue because once they weaken it, it’ll continue to be weakened until it no longer serves it’s purpose.
I think he said the NEA didn’t run anything. And that the endorsement came from PSEA.
I don’t know enough about Meehan’s challenger but I have to wonder if they(his team) did outreach and if they approached groups and individuals with both his and his opponents position on Medicare and Social Security?
It’s fairly apparent they consider the issue important to them. Why not ask about the timing?
In my case they are targeting a lame duck(Webb) but I suspect the real target in Virginia is Warner. They are going to need all the help they can get too since Warner is the one leading the charge on decimating or in his mind “saving” Social Security. He’s a popular sitting Senator. I’d be positvely surprised despite his proclivities on Social Security if the Democratic activists manage to field a credible challenger to him. I’m always hoping to be pleasantly surprised though(or be on hand for a round of “which group was it you called lazy again when you couldn’t even bother to field a candidate against the point man on the Democratic side for cuts?”)
It’s nice AFSCME is at least attempting to bring some pressure, but that ad is some serious weak tea.
They cite three things they want M. Udall and Bennet to do:
1) “Investing in job creation”
2) “Extending the middle-class tax cuts” and
3) Avoiding cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid
So let’s see…”Investing in Job creation” mean more tax breaks for business, right? And of course, gotta keep that “middle-class” tax cut because families making $200,000/yr can’t afford a 4% bump.
And, oh yeah, don’t cut the programs. But since the ad listed that last, I get the feeling that’s the negotiable one: “Well, we had to make some adjustments to Social Security and Medicare, but we got these cool business tax cuts that provide incentives for job creation and are really going to help grow the economy! Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, now!”
Also, the ad starts off by talking about “the deficit” as if it were a problem, rather than a lie dreamed up to have an excuse to attack non-billionaires. Very very corporatist, sadly.