Republican strategy: ignore Obama's serious debt reduction proposal

Have you noticed? GOP's mantra is: we will not approve debt ceiling increase unless it is tied to a serious proposal to reduce the deficit. I thought Obama offered one: very serious and as effective, fairer, and less draconian, with a fail safe plan.  GOP's strategy: ignore it; avoid comparisons between the two. The Democrats have not helped because instead of emphasizing the debt reduction effectiveness (the seriousness of the Obama plan), they have seized on the privatization of medicare and unfairness issues. Those are legitimate and ultimately succeeding strategies, but they only dwell on the negatives of the Republican (Ryan plan). They also need to add a third point to their talking points...the Obama plan is a serious one.

 Most Americans do believe that the debt is a problem, and the Democrats would also be wise to emphasize the positives of how their plan would be more successful in the long term...or at least, be  either just as successful...and to make a firm point that the President's plan meets the criteria for a serious and effective  plan without the pitfalls of the GOP plan.

Of course, the stumbling block is the linkage: should the debt ceiling be linked to a serious plan as a condition of approval. The Democrats need to agree to a link, but the serious plan with which  it is linked to is more like the Obama plan and then they make a case for its superiority. What the Democrats ought not to do is to draw a line in the sand, but to indicate willingness to compromise a little and then they can paint the GOP is being stubborn,
ideologically based blockheads unconcerned with the collateral damage their plan incurs.

What will be fascinating is whether any compromise can be reached by the Gang of 6 in the Senate. We can expect the House GOP to continue to act like blockheads and stonewallers, but the ultimate test will be in the Senate where the Democrats hold the majority, yet members of their own party, including Colorado's Senator Udall agree that any debt ceiling increase approval must be tied to a debt reduction plan

On the Sunday talk shows on CNN, especially the one moderated by Candy Crowley, the GOP talkers tried to shift the conversation to: we must do it in the 2012 budget....upping the ante from a focus on the intermediate and long term realities of the federal deficit to doing a it all in the budget...a short term issue...  and then up the ante further by advocating for a balanced budget amendment (a short term political non starter) .Voters are going to have to become aware  of the long term solutions of deficit reduction vs. the practicality of an annual budget doing the entire  job now  and I think it is very easy for the GOP to obfuscate the entire debate as they confuse the two in the minds of the public. 

The danger of extreme 2012 budget reductions lies in the timing: severe cuts could stunt the recovery which is still a feeble one.  Like the UK, the danger lies in impact on the gross domestic product which in the UK's austerity program is now negative with  an increase in unemployment creating a strain on unemployment compensation funds.  A gradual move to austerity, as reflected in the Obama plan, may avoid the UK experience and the GOP's more abrupt one could actually harm the economy. Timing is everything. The Democrats could also make that point in the upcoming debate, especially since so much focus on the UK economy was the result of  media coverage of the royal wedding.