Baseless Pander: Fred Barnes argues Obama’s been trying to juice turnout and fundraising from his base by
tilting sharply to the left on issue after issue: immigration, religious liberty, welfare, gay marriage, the environment, race, the role of government.
I buy it all, except the welfare part. What group of voters (or funders) was watering down welfare reforms work requirements supposed to galvanize into action, the way Obama’s DREAM decree arguably galvanized Latino activists, or blocking the Keystone pipeline appealed to environmentalists, etc.? Especially since the Obama administration tried to hide its new welfare regulations by issuing them late on a summer Thursday. How were the allegedly pro-welfare masses supposed to get the message? … I still suspect this wasn’t a “reelection” move. It was something Obama-appointed welfare reform opponents in HHS (like Mark Greenberg) have been wanting to do, so they did it. The question is why Obama let them. …
P.S.–Journalism! In our latest Left Coast/Right Coast podcast, WaPo‘s Jen Rubin reports that, according to her sources, Romney’s staff knows what a potent issue the welfare changes are, and they were about to make a big deal about them when Obama handed them his “you didn’t build that” gaffe, which they felt they had to go with instead. But the welfare issue will be deployed later. …
Update: City Journal‘s Kay Hymowitz argues the new rules are the product of HHS and other Obama administration bureaucrats who never liked the “Work First” approach of welfare reform. She quotes welfare policy veteran Douglas Besharov:
“The domestic policy staff doesn’t believe in ‘work first’; they want education, job training, and support. If they had their way, they would have gotten those provisions in the [welfare reform] reauthorization. Now they see they will not control the House and it will be impossible to get through their policies.”