Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BigBearJohn

(11,410 posts)
Mon Oct 15, 2012, 04:43 AM Oct 2012

WOW. Talk about an EYE-OPENER. Phew.

Let’s first imagine that, on January 20, Romney takes the oath of office. Of the many secret post-victory plans floating around in the inner circles of the campaigns, the least secret is Romney’s intention to implement Paul Ryan’s budget. The Ryan budget has come to be almost synonymous with the Republican Party agenda, and Romney has embraced it with only slight variations. It would repeal Obamacare, cut income-tax rates, turn Medicare for people under 55 years old into subsidized private insurance, increase defense spending, and cut domestic spending, with especially large cuts for Medicaid, food stamps, and other programs targeted to the very poor.

Few voters understand just how rapidly Romney could achieve this, rewriting the American social compact in one swift stroke. Ryan’s plan has never attracted Democratic support, but it is not designed for bipartisanship. Ryan deliberately built it to circumvent a Senate filibuster, stocking the plan with budget legislation that is allowed, under Senate “budget reconciliation” procedures, to pass with a simple majority. Republicans have been planning the mechanics of the vote for many months, and Republican insiders expect Romney to use reconciliation to pass the bill. Republicans would still need to control 50 votes in the Senate (Ryan, as vice-president, would cast the tiebreaking vote), but if Romney wins the presidency, he’ll likely precipitate a partywide tail wind that would extend to the GOP’s Senate slate.

One might suppose that at least a handful of Republicans might blanch at the prospect of reshaping the entire face of government unilaterally. But Ryan’s careful organizing of the party agenda has all taken place with this vote as the end point, and with the clear goal of sidestepping any such objection. When Republicans won control of Congress during the 2010 elections, Ryan successfully lobbied the party to take a vote on his budget plan the following April. The plan stood no chance of passage (given Obama’s certain veto) and exposed dozens of vulnerable House members to withering attacks over its unpopular provisions. So why hold a vote carrying huge potential risk and no chance of immediate success? So Ryan could get the party on record supporting his plan, depriving quiet dissidents of any future excuse to defect should the real vote come in 2013.

PLEASE READ THE WHOLE THING:
[link:http://nymag.com/news/politics/elections-2012/obama-romney-economic-plans-2012-10/|

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

2on2u

(1,843 posts)
3. Hopefully millionaires will still be able to apply for unemployment insurance cuz they most
Mon Oct 15, 2012, 06:05 AM
Oct 2012

likely will need it once these lightweights reverse the direction of all things important.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,320 posts)
5. Though the chances of Republicans getting 50 Senate seats are now fairly low
Mon Oct 15, 2012, 06:30 AM
Oct 2012

Nate Silver puts it under 20%, and says that Romney's gains have not been spreading to Senate races.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

muriel_volestrangler

(101,320 posts)
6. Here's a bit of bullshit from Chait, early on:
Mon Oct 15, 2012, 06:41 AM
Oct 2012

"In fact, shortly after the next Inaugural Ball—perhaps very, very shortly after—the great stalemate between socialism and social Darwinism will break open and likely turn decisively in one direction or the other."

No. Nothing Obama, nor the Democrats in general, has proposed can be called 'socialism'. The Democratic plan is for roughly what has been the direction or reality of the USA since FDR, averaged out. A few of FDR's moves might have been seen as socialism, but really they were temporary Keynesian measures to keep employment up, and build infrastructure. They did not try to take over the means of production, nor banking. Reforms about social security and healthcare since then have been no more socialist than they were when Bismarck introduced them in Germany.

Chait is too intelligent and informed to believe what he wrote. Why the hell he did write it, I can't tell. But it puts the rest of the article in a very bad light, whatever he writes after it.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
7. K&R WOW. Best I've read in a looooong time. Simply WOW.
Mon Oct 15, 2012, 07:02 AM
Oct 2012

Now we really know what is at stake. And for me, it gives me a lot more faith in President Obama.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WOW. Talk about an EYE-O...