Book of the Month

Genghis's picture

GOP Picks Wingnuts for Deficit Super Committee

by Genghis 8/10/2011 - 2:50 pm

Across the board it's difficult to fathom any of the six Republicans on the committee agreeing to significant new revenues. All of them have signed Grover Norquist's anti-tax pledge. None of the Senators participated in the bipartisan Gang of Six talks, which resulted in a plan that called for higher revenues. And many of them have helped lead the GOP fight against increasing taxes in any deficit package -- part of a broader bid to force Democrats to agree to significant cuts to entitlement programs.

Read the full article at http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/gop-leaders-pick-conservative-members-to-serve-on-deficit-super-committee.php

Reid picked Murray, Baucus and Kerry as the Senate Dems.   

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/democrats-murray-baucus-kerry-on-super-committee-20110809

by AmericanDreamer 8/10/2011 - 3:48 pm

IMO, Baucus was responsible for the health care debate going tits up. Him being on this committee only means I'm not going to be surprised at the ground the Democrats would be willing to surrender without an equal amount of ground being surrendered from the GOPer camp.

by Beetlejuice 8/10/2011 - 8:26 pm (re: AmericanDreamer)

Baucus is a long way from my favorite Senator, too.  But maybe he'll be an institutionalist and insist on new revenues as a way of keeping the Senate Finance Committee, which he Chairs, in on the action.  Just because he was on the conservative end of the Democratic caucus on HC doesn't necessarily mean that's where he is on new revenue.  I've not seen comments from him on where he is on that issue yet--maybe others have.

by AmericanDreamer 8/10/2011 - 9:07 pm (re: Beetlejuice)

I didn't see any comments on his position with HC at the beginning of the debate, however towards the end I had no doubts where it was going, to my dissatisfaction.

by Beetlejuice 8/11/2011 - 7:02 am (re: AmericanDreamer)

Sounds like the GOPer's are dead-set on threatening to let the trigger mechanism kick in if the Democrats don't yield to their demands.  I wonder if the Democrats are willing to let those automatic cuts happen if the GOPer's refuse to give ground? I suspect the GOPer's think they can bully the Democrats into letting entitlements take the lion's share of cuts.

by Beetlejuice 8/10/2011 - 8:23 pm

I don't recall entitlements being on the block as part of the trigger option--my understanding was that triggered cuts would come out of other domestic spending (what is called "discretionary spending") and defense.  There are hardly any GOP caucus members who want to see defense get whacked in any significant way.    

by AmericanDreamer 8/10/2011 - 11:52 pm (re: Beetlejuice)

I'll place a bet with you their agenda will be going after entitlements during the debates and when it looks like the trigger option will be exercised they'll demand they be included in the trigger option too.

by Beetlejuice 8/11/2011 - 6:47 am (re: AmericanDreamer)

Actually, the Republicans hoped the White House would put SS and Medicare cuts on the table this time, instead of them. 

Which is what happened.

Rove wrote a piece in the WSJ online where, after having in an earlier piece--all in Obama's and the Democrats' very best electoral interests, of course--suggested to Obama proposing a grand bargain on debt reduction, he proceeded to note that it was the Democrats who had proposed cuts to SS and Medicare. 

by AmericanDreamer 8/11/2011 - 9:52 am (re: Beetlejuice)

So how much do you want to wager?

by Beetlejuice 8/11/2011 - 11:26 am (re: AmericanDreamer)

The Joint Committee can recommend any kind of deficit-reduction measures it wants: further cuts in the new discretionary caps, cuts in any entitlement program, and tax increases of any kind. There may be severe political constraints, but there are no legal constraints, contrary to what some congressional leaders are claiming.

source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "How the Potential Across-the Board-Cuts in the Debt Limit Deal Would Occur", Richard Kogan, August 8, at:  http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

It's entirely possible entitlement cuts (including, but not limited to, SS/Medicare--sorry, stilli, trying to stick to the language the technical experts are using on this) will be discussed by members of the committee.  

If the supercommittee does not get a majority of 7 or more votes in favor of any specific proposal, the automatic cuts will kick in.  In which case:

  • The $55 billion in annual non-defense cuts would come from both mandatory (entitlement) and discretionary programs. The mandatory cuts would include:
    • Cuts in Medicare payments to providers and insurance plans (those cuts are limited to 2 percent of such payments in any year, or about $10 billion in 2013).
    •  
    • About $7 billion in cuts in the other mandatory programs that are subject to sequestration, the biggest of which is farm price supports. A number of key mandatory programs are exempt from sequestration, including Social Security, Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement.

source: same as above

  • So, the only way there are literally no cuts to entitlement programs (not synonymous with cuts to the end beneficiaries of those programs, as noted above) is if the supercommittee gets 7 or more members to agree to proposed cuts that don't include any, and which end up getting enacted into law.

So, no bet.

by AmericanDreamer 8/11/2011 - 12:00 pm (re: Beetlejuice)

People, people! They are not "entitlements." They are "safety nets." Safety nets are much more palatable than entitlements, doncha think?

If the repubs can call rich people job creators, trying to shift the perception, can't we do it, too?

by stillidealistic 8/11/2011 - 12:50 am

I agree it's people who create the wealth. Problem is, the GOPer's have no clue there are some American's ... mostly not part of their base ... who work for a living that create the wealth the rich enjoy. In fact, I'm of the opinion they firmly believe any salary above minimum wage is employee wage theft. And benefits are evil because they steadily suck from the wealth teats.

The GOPer's have found a goldmine of campaign contributions with catering to the whims and needs of the wealthy above servicing the wants, needs and desires of the public who puts them in office. As long as there are people willing to keep them in office ... see the results of Wisconsin recall election ... it's an evil we all have to live and deal with.

by Beetlejuice 8/11/2011 - 7:03 am (re: stillidealistic)

The pundits on Lawrence McDonnell's show both saw Portman as the possible wild card in the mix.  The question was whether he would embrace party loyalty or saving the global economy which he knows is on the brink of going over the edge in part because of the stagnant economy of the US.  The key was some kind of pairing of Portman and Kerry attempting to rise above the partisanship.

by Another Trope 8/11/2011 - 7:26 am

And within the terms of the debt agreement, if Portman and Kerry were to "rise above the partisanship", that would mean they would do what, exactly?

by AmericanDreamer 8/11/2011 - 9:54 am (re: Another Trope)

Tax the rich (through tax reform) to generate more revenue and to avoid more extensive cuts to government spending in order help stimulate not only our economy but those overseas.

by Another Trope 8/11/2011 - 10:21 am (re: AmericanDreamer)

Is there reason based on what he's said and done to think Portman might be a GOP heretic on revenues?  Knowing his history, why, then, would they have appointed him?  Won't Boehner have brought the curtain down on his Speakership if Portman actually does go over to the dark side on revenues? 

by AmericanDreamer 8/11/2011 - 10:34 am (re: Another Trope)

Pelosi picks Van Hollen, Clyburn and Bacera:

http://www.nationaljournal.com//congress/pelosi-announces-picks-for-super-committee-20110811

by AmericanDreamer 8/11/2011 - 2:53 pm

Latest Comments

more