With President Obama winning high marks from the public while making the case for increased government "investment" in the face of GOP opposition, the political landscape was scrambled further by yesterday's joint announcement by leaders of the Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO backing government spending to promote the nation's infrastructure. What's critical about this development, besides its novelty, is that it squeezes the GOP's leadership between the wishes of their leading corporate donors and biggest-spending lobbyists ($100 million) -- and the anti-spending fervor of the Tea Party and their own incendiary rhetoric.
"With the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO standing together to support job creation, we hope that Democrats and Republicans in Congress will also join together to build America’s infrastructure," said Chamber president Tom Donohue and AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka in what some have called their "hell freezes over" statement. Despite bitter disputes with the Chamber over everything from union-busting to health reform to trade (see this barrage of attacks on the AFL-CIO blog), the New Centrism, post-Tucson vibe seems to have come to two longtime combatants, at least on this one issue.
At the same time, a coalition of progressive groups and labor organizations pushed President Obama into taking a tougher stance defending Social Security than otherwise might have been expected, given that he created a deficit commission that recommended sharp cuts and raising the retirement age. Before the speech, Roger Hickey of Campaign for America's Future, a leading catalyst in the fight to protect Social Security, told In These Times, "We're trying to convince the White House that President Obama and the Democratic Party shouldn't commit political suicide over this issue."
Progressives are also making other strides in this tough, post-November political and fiscal climate. While the campaign to promote the political and economic soundness of defending Social Security was a relatively low-budget initiative -- with just $ 1 million budgeted for a radio ad campaign in Washington -- it also ginned up nearly one million messages to the White House, Roger Hickey observes, generated in part by Moveon.org, the 780,000 pleas organized by the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, and an array of more than 250 progressive groups under the umbrella of the Strengthen Social Security campaign.
What's especially notable about this campaign is that it didn't simply hew to whatever centrist, business-leaning line-of-the-week that the White House was promoting in promoting a "reform" agenda -- as did the progressive coalitions supporting health care and financial reform -- but supported an independent agenda that went beyond what the White House seemed willing to do initially. In some ways, it's politically low-hanging fruit -- urging Congress and the White House not to cave on the signature policy issue that has successfully defined Democrats for decades -- and is wildly popular with voters. Yet it also marks a coming of age for today's progressive movement that has learned the hard way that even a charismatic Democratic president they worked hard to elect needs to be pushed much harder than they've usually been willing to do. Of course, the fight to preserve Social Security is hardly over, including the ongoing need to push back against a media still portraying Social Security as linked to the deficit (it's not funded from general revenues) and soon to run out of money.
The president said in his speech:
To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. We must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans' guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.
As Roger Hickey pointed out in a fund-raising email blast after the speech:
You did it! The State of the Union speech could have been a disaster. But you helped us push the president in the right direction.
You joined the Campaign for America's Future to help sound the alarm to President Barack Obama that he must fight for jobs — not Social Security cuts. And he got the message.
We won this round. But the fight isn't over. And we need your help to keep fighting...
We also told President Obama to concentrate on jobs. And he did, backing public investment and opposing “job killing” budget cuts.
Was it good enough? No. The president still left the door open to future Social Security cuts. And his jobs plans are not big enough to get all Americans working.
But now that we have the White House moving in the right direction, let’s keep pushing. We have to take on the conservatives in Congress who call for slashing spending and have no jobs plan. We have to push for a bold jobs agenda.
And that's where the Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO coalition on supporting investment in technology, research and infrastructure comes in. It could help to reframe the debate in Congress about the role of government spending as an engine of economic growth and job creation, even if President Obama's $50 billion infrastructure plan went nowhere last year after the PR shellacking and smear job the original $786 billion stimulus plan has faced.
A Chamber spokesperson told In These Times that the Chamber supported the original stimulus plan but didn't take a position on the subsequent $50 billion proposal that died last year. The Chamber, besides spending millions to defeat Democrats, unions and regulations, also supports some forms of government spending to help businesses and create jobs beyond just tax cuts and deregulation -- the GOP's panacea for everything that ails the country.
While accepting those nostrums, the Chamber president, in a speech in mid-January, also called for programs that would:
Rebuild America’s economic foundation—the platform our society runs on. Roads, bridges, rail and mass transit networks, airports, and air transport systems must be modernized. Broadband capacity, power generation, and water supplies must be expanded. We can create jobs, reduce our trade and budget deficits, and increase our own security by developing all forms of alternative, renewable, and traditional energy. We will also commence a new project to outline what our nation must do to create and secure a 21st century global supply chain and logistics system.
In their joint statement, Trumka and Donohue declared:
America's working families and business community stand united in applauding President Obama's call to create jobs and grow our economy through investment in our nation's infrastructure.
"Whether it is building roads, bridges, high-speed broadband, energy systems and schools, these projects not only create jobs and demand for businesses, they are an investment in building the modern infrastructure our country needs to compete in a global economy.
If Congress responds to this unusual joint call in a political climate shaped by deficit-mania and cowed by Tea Party extremism, then hell may, if not freeze over, indeed start cooling.
UPDATE: I talked about Obama's centrism and the role of progressives before the State of the Union Speech with journalist Jonathan Rowe, now a contributor to the important new policy website Remapping Debate, on his talk show on KWMR, West Marin's community radio station (about three minutes in after the music and lead-ins).
**********************
This article originally appeared in the Working In These Times blog that covers economic and labor-related issues.
Robert Kuttner: Where's the Protest at Home?
"...My perhaps immodest proposal: Organized labor should stop relying on the highly paid media consultants who lost the message war during the Employee Free Choice Act and instead rely on teams of guerilla investigative journalists..."
http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/6907/labor_should_ditch_highly_paid_consultant_rely_on_guerilla_journalists/
Here's an idea...we remove the cap for individuals then cap what businesses pay say to $110K.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201101280020
I'd love to put my money elsewhere as a 29 year old . . . if I see SS at all, it will be weak.
The only problems with SS is that elected officials like to use the fund as their own personal piggy banks. You also have the salary cap, with no one paying into SS for the income over 115,000 or 120,000, I believe. They should also do means testing along with Medicare. Those with plenty should do the patriotc thing and take care of themselves for love of the country that gave them so much.
SS would be fine, except for the elected officials that are robbing you and I, who has paid into it for over 45 years. Like abortion and socialism the right loves using fear as a motivator. Don't be afraid.
F & F.
Obama speak is equivocal, filled with sophistry & vague twaddle.
Even when he gives a supposed strong response, I no longer trust him.
If he was the compromiser in chief, I might have a little more faith in him, but his "style" over the last two years has shown him to be the sellout in chief, and the worst poker player/negotiator I've ever seen in a political leadership position in any party.
He should be studying how FDR handled the rich who fought him on everything.
Look for him to come out and say he was held hostage again and had to compromise Social Security and Medicare to save jobs or something.
Is it possible that the President liked the way Reagan used strategy to get things done? Did Reagan have a t-party movement in congress fighting 'him' every step of the way, and damned to make him a one term President no matter what?
and compared to the myth they've created about him....
if we'd kept the Reagan tax rates..., some of which he RAISED,,,,,
our debt would be a LOT less than it is now............
-------------
With the high price of gas, the govt must be taking in a lot more on 'gas tax.' With these increased revenues, we should be able to pay for the roads and bridges infra-stucture program without affecting the general budget.
This is a win-win-win, including the Washington politicians, while American drivers are being screwed and the Middle East turmoil is taking the blame.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/ask/gasoline_faqs.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QnZ7BzfXPg
BUT
Take a look at where the Nanny state takes us.
"Spain jobless rate surges to 20.33 percent." HP Headline.
The Nanny state does not work.
Mixed economies have provided the highest quality of life in the history of the world - for the largest numbers of people, for the longest time. It's only since bringing in "privatisation" that western Europe is seeing this kind of fluctuations since the 60s.
as in the South American or for that matter Russian states.
The free market doesn't mean NO regulation. It means smart regulation.
I.e., Commercial and investment banks need to be separated
and not allowed to use deposits for "investments" bets in derivatives.
Government has a role, just not the only role, as liberals want.
Denmark a "Nanny State"?
The German jobless rate, adjusted for seasonal swings, declined to 7.8 percent from 8 percent in February.
Don't just pick one and crow (Spain is a "nanny state?). Take a bigger sample. Makes a better mathematical statement.
1. The corporations are not backing them, they are using them - just like they use the Dems.
2. If this is to be the Corporations' colony, they want it to run well. An intact Infrastructure is essential for this.
3. Corporations are not necessarily anti all societal spending, they just want the money and the power. They are not very interested party partisan issues, except to exploit them.
The point is all people try to exploit for their best interest.
That is why the Founding Fathers made it so hard to get that done.
Though the news media has yet to talk about it - the 2nd National Hiring Day is coming in a month. This is a day that corporations are encouraged to hire new employees. Corporations are called on to put patriotism first and help their country in hard times. Those corporations that cannot hire, are asked to stop firing for that month.
There has never been a time In American History where it is less difficult for Corporations to hire, and more helpful to all Americans if they did.
This may help us all.