E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS“The Senate approved a sweeping package yesterday that allowed the United States to begin borrowing more money, and President Obama signed the legislation just hours before the country would have faced default on its obligations,” the Boston Globe writes before previewing the fight over revenue and the required 12-member committee: “A 12-member joint congressional committee will be formed over the next two weeks to find up to another $1.5 trillion in savings. A key question is whether the committee, which must make its recommendations by Thanksgiving, will address increased tax revenue - something Democrats say is imperative but Republicans have opposed.”
The Washington Post adds, “The bipartisan panel, to be named this month, is likely to confront the same ideological divide that caused an almost crippling impasse in the debt-limit debate. Republican leaders are warning that they will not include anyone on the panel who is willing to raise taxes, prompting Democrats to threaten a hard line against cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits.”
“The push to reduce the U.S. debt is shifting to the makeup of the special congressional panel charged with finding further spending cuts and whether its 12 members can consider rewriting the tax code,” Bloomberg writes. “Republican leaders at the Capitol are pledging to appoint members who oppose tax increases. Their Democratic counterparts make clear they will name lawmakers who’ll fight to raise new revenue and protect entitlement benefits Republicans say should be targeted.” But Republicans will not.
Roll Call also notes that the fight already brewing is over the 12-member panel.
More Roll Call: “While Congress wrestled with the debt ceiling, plenty of other issues languished — including energy, education reform, consideration of the war in Libya, trade deals and more — to the chagrin of rank-and-file lawmakers who spent much of the past few months waiting for a handful of leaders to hash out a deal.”
Leave a Comment:
Mitch McConnell is hand picking the republicans so you know they will be total obstructionist's ...This guy is a disgrace to the congress ..where is their leadership ...take him off the committees so we can have some progress ...these idiots get over 16 thousand dollars a month as pay and do nothing for it !
Say it isn't so
Pelosi and Reid are going to pick obstructionists who won't even talk about reforming social security and medicare. So now what do we do. Don't just blame one party for being obstructionists, they BOTH are. Both cuts and raising revenue must be on the table. Close all loopholes for everyone, not just the rich, some of the tax credits are absolutely ridiculous. Why am I paying my tax dollars for other people's day care? Everyone (no matter their income level) gets to deduct what they pay for childcare, WHY?? Everyone who buys a house (no matter their income level) gets to deduct what they pay in property taxes to their state, WHY???? Some of these ridiculous deductions and credits have to go away. Of course the corporate loopholes must be closed, but these other ridiculous credits must also be addressed.
Social Security and medicare? Why are those two so important to you? Why not Defense, Commerce Department, securities and exchange commission instead? The Federal Trade Commission is pretty useless; why not disolve it and replace with a law enforcement agency instead?
I can NOT understand why Republicans and the Tea Party are so adamant about Soc. Sec. and Medicare/Medicaid. Why on earth do they NOT look to reduce other government entities which will not put citizens in difficulty or harm? The only answer I can fathom is: a dollar. They don't want to reduce costs on any government agency which may facilitate or promote business/free enterprise and would rather cut or disolve agency which assist people with necessities. Profit is more important to them than people. I cannot accept that way of thinking; it makes not sense to me.
I urge ALL Republicans and Tea Party members to read (and understand) the Fifth Chapter of the book of James in the Holy Bible - unless you are Muslim or believe in Islam. I believe the debt/deficit reduction debate should be founded upon James 5 (unless Norquist & Co. are just a bunch of hippocrits spewing out talking points. If they truly believe as they profess to believe then they should get off the Soc. Sec./Medicaid reduction bandwagon! If, on the other hand, they are just a bunch of hippocritical liars - then carry on.)
Couldn't agree with you more ALL government agencies should be on the table. My point was that as so many republicans won't consider tax hikes and they will likely be the one's put on the committee, the same will be done by the democrats, they will put people on the committee who won't consider changes to medicare or any other entitlement program, I think most people agree that even after all the tax loopholes are closed medicare and ssn are going to have to be changed in some way for future recipients. So really my point is, the committee is useless, you'll have 6 repubs that won't raise/change taxes, and 6 dems that won't consider any changes to any other programs. So now we have a stalemate and nothing will get done.
Then in the end when the trigger gets triggered pentagon spending will be cut, (which it should be) and repayments to medicare docs will be lowered resulting in less providers who will accept medicare patients. So guess what, senior are really the only loosers in the end and that is because no doctor will see them.
Why not look into wasteful spending by Big Government first as a thought. Does Big Gov actually know what money is being channeled to where and for what purpose?
Is the Medicare med program better than the cost the VA negotiated for meds?
Why are the foxes guarding the henhouse? Shouldn't economists be on the panel rather than political stooges, hand picked by dysfunctional Congressional leaders?
What ever happened to the Simpson-Bowles recommendations and report? Why didn't Barry O and Congress move forward on those recommendations?
Why do liberals believe spending will get us out of the recession?
And when the nasty redhead tells me in a post to STFU, is that a violation of the Code?
hunky,
Feisty violates the Code of Conduct everyday here, but because she is part of the Libs-R-Us, she gets a pass. Just put her on ignore, that should solve the propblem.
Hunky,
Its not what you do. its when you do it.We need to do the right thing at the right time, instead of the right thing at the wrong time. The time to reduce government spending and borrowing and lower taxes is when the rest of the economy is doing well. The time to increase government spending and raise revenue is when the rest of the economy is doing poorly. Where are we on that chart of events at the present time? The Government should be the ultimate contrarian and run on a counter cyclical basis to the private economy. It should be spending and hiring when the economy is weak and curtailling spending and laying off when the economy is strong. This is just common sense.
The reverse has repeatedly shown itself to be a disaster in the making. If the government increases spending and hiring when the economy is doing well it will not have the resources it needs to bridge the difficult times. If the government curtails spending and hiring in hard times it makes those hard times that much worse! Come on now folks this is just common sense. The fact is that during the last decade of prosperity the government dramatically increased its spending ( much of it on futile wars instead of investment in its citizens) and dramatically increased the size of government as well. It borrowed money, lots of it, instead of building up reserves. At this point in time we are in a very very tough spot because no one had the foresight or disipline to call a halt to this reckless and insane behavior. This is not the time to make more mistakes, these conservative policies are not wrong policies, they are just the wrong policies at this time.
As government programs are cut so are jobs. I understand that most programs need reform for more efficient government but I do not believe the beneficiaries of these programs should suffer from the so called "reforms".
We all know that medical costs are the main reason for increases in our debt, so why not manage the cost of medical supplies, pharmacuticals and so on; instead of denying all Americans access to healthcare.
This new committee will hold up progress again and create more chaos in the country.
I do not like this deal because it mentioned nothing about the reforming the tax code for corporations that do not need taxpayer assistance. Thes tax deductions is spending that we can no longer afford; cut them for large corporations and leave small businesses alone.
James,
During this recession, did you pull in your purse strings, reevaluate your spending habits and make the necessary corrections to ensure you will survive the issues? Are you concerned about paying off your debts, rather than go out to purchase that new car of big screen TV?
Many of us, irregardless of income probably did - except the government. Comsumers look at intake and out-take and make adjustments to survive. Government doesn't see it that way, they either borrow more or print more to exist and to continue along with the programs needed to grow their base.
Do you believe our government actually cares about you or I? I am of the impression they are more interested in their seat, their party and the special interest groups that provide them the funds for re-election.
If the average House or Senate member had to identify line-item budget numbers, who received them, or what purpose and what benefit was received for those funds, many wouldn't have a clue. How many wasteful programs may be out in the funding arena today? The Gang of 6 attempted to identify but I am certain more dollars are available to be cut without harming many programs.
Barry O, with his controlling House and Senate, went out with the Federal checkbook and spent on the car companies, who would have survived under bankrupcy plans. He spent on the stimulus more than Bush did, and what have we received for the amounts of fund spent? Then he furthered the spending with the Financial Sector, sent jobs to China and created a HC program that will further tax workers.
This administration has increased debt, haven't they? According to the CBO numbers, the deficit has increased more under Barry than the rest of the administrations.
Yes, I agree there is a time to build and reduce government, gov. spending, and gov. waste. We seem to have migrated from a government that is there to serve the people, to the people who are here to serve the government.
This administration has developed a policy that believes spending is the method for removing us from the recession. Is is though? They have spent and where are the results? Until more people are put back into the worker pool, consumer confidence is at a level where consumer spending increases and credit card debt is minimized, the world markets rebound and more taxes are paid into the Treasury, we won't survive. Can this country sustain the debt incurred without it?
I agree that there is no good time to reduce government size, but now. And to further move for a more efficient system for spending, governing, and policies to promote job creation.
I will agree that it is time to remove from office, those professional politicians who continue to hamper and impeed our republican form of government. There is nothing incorrect with having a peaceful revolution in this country.
Happy to be an Elephant in the Room!
thetotas
hunky,
Hunky, The arrogance of the RePOOPlicans never fails to amaze me. They just cannot and will not humble down and admit that their policies over the past ten years or more have been a complete failure. And I don't think their policies are bad policies, I just think that they apply them at the wrong time and for the wrong reasons, mostly political in defiance of sound public policy.
Why did they let Cheney and GW Bush spend money like a drunken sailor when the economy was doing well and they had a surplus? One would think that as fiscal conservatives they would want to maintain that surplus and save it for a rainy day. Why did they allow Bush to lie to the American Public and jump into two futile wars at a now estimated cost of $4.4 Trillion dollars, 1/3rd of the national debt! Were they so arrogant that they thought the hyped up good times would go on forever? The truth is Bush pumped up the economy artifiicially for political reasons because he was first and foremost a weakling with no moral conviction, a puppet president of the spoiled rich, and unfit to be President of the United States, period.
If the RePOOPlicans would really like to help America and its people it would be appropriate for them to humble up. Get off their bombastic high horse and admit like grown men to their abysmal failures, and their reprehensible sell out to international business pirates.
I knew the selection of the "Gang of 12" was going to turn into a fight, even Washington predicted it by putting those "Triggers" into the language.
Since the deal, a new poll still shows that Americans (dems and Repubs) are not happy with this deal and 62% still support raising revenue through tax reform and closing loopholes, not raising taxes, raise revenue by cutting out subsidies and loopholes that so many of the corporations, companies and billionaires and millionaires enjoy. 56% of the people polled said they would support and vote for a candidate that accomplished raising revenue in this manner.
"Since the deal, a new poll still shows that Americans (dems and Repubs) are not happy with this deal and 62% still support raising revenue through tax reform and closing loopholes.."
Well- looks like some pretty good campaign ad copy to me, Robert. I bet the DNC figures it out too.
Bob (numbers)- don't be a knucklehead. What the hell is wrong with you, anyway??
Raising new revenue is every bit as important and legitimate as cutting spending and much more likely to actually happen!
The look we got of the inner workings of the House during the debt crisis makes me think they are the most useless bunch in the whole government. I propose we elect teachers and firefighters to represent us in Congress in 2012, you know, people who actually know how to work together and accomplish something.
Amy,
By 'teachers and firefighters' , you actually mean leftist Democrat union hacks, who will give the keys to the public treasury away for looting.
Bob -
I believe she means American citizens who care about and have compassion for their country and their fellow man instead of the obstinate, worthless Norquist pledgers who are there now.
Clarified?
Some people may call those people members of the tea party
Good point, Janet
The Teapublicans worked together to nearly bring our economy to its knees. What they accomplished was damaging our reputation world-wide, preserving tax loopholes used by the wealthiest Americans, and slashing student loan spending for the middleclass. Way to go Tea Party!
Thank goodness for the Elephant. It's good to be a fiscal terrorist!
No I mean people who care about this country American citizens who care about and have compassion for their country and their fellow man. They care about their country just as much as any liberal who insists on continuing handouts for those who WILL not help themselves. We must have welfare reform and end generational welfare recipients, along with tax reform
Amy,
The Tea Party did no such thing, you have no clue what this movement is about. The Tea Party Movement started in 2009, our reputation has be damaged way before that.
"handouts for those who WILL not help themselves"
Are you referring to the Bush Tax cuts which drove up our federal deficit or to the Republican predilection for pork barrel spending that contributed to that debt?
Nope I'm talking about the people in this country that have been on welfare for generation and generation
If Reid appoints Warner, Durbin or any Senate Democrat up for re-election, the process is likely doomed. Even so, I can already envision the GOP argument: the Democrats by refusing to compromise are willing to slash defense by insisting on an increase in taxes that does not have the votes to pass the Congress. Unless and until the Democrats are willing to take on the GOP filibuster or to raise the possibility that the Dems will use at least 41 votes to block anything that doesn't include taxes, then the Dems have an empty bluff. Obama could win his argument for taxes if he would just start parading before the cameras the truly unbiased members of Wall Street and economics, most notably Bill Gross whose PIMCO funds hold the majority of bondinvestments for state and local governments, pension plans, and likely that top 2% that is so adverse to taxes. It amazes me that the two minds in the investment community, Gross and Warren Buffett, that the affluent are most likely to look to for investment advice, they are willing to ignore on issues of public policy that effect their long term wealth and the wealth of the US.
I would guess that the Committee of 12 will have to start their negotiation over what shape the negotiating table should be and who gets the chairs with armrests. That ought to take them up to Thanksgiving. Then they will be able to get down to the serious matter of who shall pay for lunch. Once they agree on a check splitting details they can progress to the schedule itself and address such issues as recesses, who should recuse themselves and when, who can excuse themselves and when and how often, and then move on to important issues like dress code and frequency of bathroom breaks. When all that is done, wrangling over the agenda can begin, we should be celebrating the 2014 New Year about then!
Let's take a step back... because of an apathetic democratic block of voters that did not get out to vote in the mid-term election, we now have a majority in both opposing houses. The proposed Gang of 12 committee will deadlock. The party of no taxes will block everything, even if it could help our economy.
Regretfully, the Republican party has been tainted by Tea party members that were elected by Republicans, Independents and effectively Democrats who did not vote.
The only way anything will get done is to fire all the Republicans that said "No" and killed nearly everything that Obama proposed by voting them out in 2012! In my opinion, the republicans have done nothing but destroy our economy. Name one bill that was passed by Congress that created jobs during President Obama's term? The Republican party has been successful at one thing... keeping the President from doing his job.
They have done nothing for this country other than keep their pledge to make him a one term President. How childish is that?
Here it is. Take it or leave it. The Tea Party or should I say the Kindergarten Congress speaks again. I sense fear in the leadership of the New Congress. Fear consists of self preservation. The bravest of men know what it is. It is not a ridiculous malady, or one that a person need be ashamed of under ordinary circumstances. But these are not ordinary circumstances. The pledges could lead our country to self destruct. Signing a narrow pledge can be dangerous. What if a president signed a pledge to the Pope that demands loyalty to an entity, we the people, did not elect...History? Bring forth your own light and you will shine.
It is all about timing. Unfortunately those who don't know their past are doomed to repeat it. Congress had done the very same thing back in 1937. Roosevelt had the economy moving forward and unemployment was down to around 12%. He was forced by conservatives to cut back and the economy fell back into depression and unemployment shot back up to over 20%.
That's history but just to bring you to the present, the Brits voted in the conservatives and they created an "Austerity program" that cut many things. How's that going? Well currently England's economy is dropping and unemployment is rising.
The same will soon be happening here as our economy needs money in not pulled out.
I don't think anyone, both Republican and Democrats, disagrees with the need to overhaul our spending/funding process.Sure we need to cut spending on unworthy programs that do not provide viable benifits for our Country as a Whole and eliminate waste in those programs that do provide tangible benifits. All funding bills should be stand-a-lone on their own merit without riders or pork added to them.
Everone also realizes that our Country must have revenues in order to operate and that means tax's. The real question is how much revenue are the American people willing to provide. This is where the difference between the Republican party and Democratic party have sharp division.
The Republicans want only to pay for programs that support their special interests which is in perserving their current wealth while at the same time removing any restrictions that may stand in the way of increasing their wealth. They are all adament that they should notbe required to pay for social programs that are in place to benifit the general population calling such social programs socialism in a very negative context.
The Democrats while realizing the importance of perserving their current wealth also understand that without some regulation of those with the greatest wealth, the wealthy will become more wealthy and powerfull while at the same time sucking the lifeblood from those who are not wealthy. We are now seeing this with the GOP's latest concerted effort, both at a local level in states like Wisconsin and at a Federal level such as with the Ferderal Aviaton Administrations funding, aimed soley at eliminating workers rights and in effect thier vioce in government. So the Democrats are in support of social programs that are in place for all Americans, not just the wealtiest and believe they deserve funding.
Durring the deficit debates I heard a very profound statement from one of the Tea Party members of our House of Representatives when he was questioned over the inequity of a CEO's tax rate being less than that of his sectrataries. His response was one of indignation stateing that the 1% of Americans makeing one million or more a year paid 50% of the income tax. Wow, stop and thing about it, he just said that 1% of Americans who's tax rate is lower that the remaining 99% pay half of the income tax piad. It's mind boggling to think just how much income that 1% must be making to pay that much in tax's, of course that's only counting income that's reported and not stashed in some Swiss bank account.
It's very simple, if you believe social programs have value you must provide funding for them. If not(just be carefull what you ask for) continue electing those Republicans who don't want to fund those programs.
My point is that the GOP is only representing about 1% of Americans best interests and the rest who vote for them are just being played for fools. If this 1% dosent already own our Country, it's time the average American wage earner woke up and stated to level the playing field and took our Country back.