[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
United States News Title: Republicans Want A Mulligan On The Super Committee The dynamic that forced DC to create a Super Committee as an escape hatch before the US government slammed itself headlong into the debt ceiling — the absolutely ironclad, fanatical unwillingness on the part of Republicans to allow any significant revenue increases, no matter what they gain in the process — remains unchanged. Therefore, it’s becoming quite likely that the so-called triggers, automatic and significant cuts to Medicare and the Depart of Defense both, will be pulled. Of course, the entire point of the triggers was for there to be a real incentive for lawmakers to cut a deal — any deal — instead of sitting on their hands and choosing the path of least resistance (from their constituents). As far as things go on the Democratic side of the Committee, this trigger seems to be working: reports indicate that Dems have offered at various points changes to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. But that’s to be expected — Democrats are center-left (often not even that) and are beholden to a heterogeneous enough political coalition that they’re not forced to adopt rigid ideology uber alles. Republicans, on the other hand, are a different story. Apparently the most they’ve found themselves able to offer when it comes to doing the “give” part of give-and-take is laughably minuscule — and is offered within the context of a further $800 billion in tax cuts, no less! Rather than get serious and offer the Democrats something they can reasonably accept on ideological and political grounds, however, most Republicans seem to be inclined to cling ever more desperately to anti-tax dogma and, in the face of Defense cuts, simply renege on the whole Super Committee deal: As pessimism mounted this week over the ability of a bipartisan Congressional committee to agree on a deficit-reduction plan, lawmakers began taking steps to head off the large cuts in Pentagon spending that would automatically result from a failure of the panel… Several members of Congress, especially Republicans on the House and Senate armed services committees, are readying legislation that would undo the automatic across-the-board cuts totaling nearly $500 billion for military programs, or exchange them for cuts in other areas of the federal budget. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, has drafted a bill that would replace the defense cuts that would occur under a process known as sequestration with a 5 percent across-the-board cut to government spending. It would be combined with a 10 percent cut in pay for members of Congress. In the House, similar measures are being assembled… The House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, said he wanted the joint committee to succeed, but would not tamper with the mechanism for automatic cuts. “I would feel bound by it,” Mr. Boehner said. “It was part of the agreement. The sequester is ugly. Why? Because we don’t want anybody to go there.” Some Democrats are increasingly concerned that some Republicans on the committee, in declaring that they will not be able to accept new revenues toward deficit reduction, are calculating that they will be able to simply reverse the triggered cuts. “Republicans should not count on taking the easy way out if they continue to resist a balanced deficit deal that includes revenue increases,” warned Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Senate Democrat… At a recent meeting of the deficit-reduction committee, Representative Dave Camp, Republican of Michigan, sought assurances that nothing would prevent Congress from changing the mechanism for automatic cuts in military spending. The witness, Douglas W. Elmendorf, the director of the Congressional Budget Office, said, “Any Congress can reverse the actions of a previous Congress.” I’m glad to see Speaker Boehner indicate that he wants no part of this BS, although I’m quite doubtful that his caucus particularly gives a damn about what he wants. Still, isn’t it self-evident that this would be an enormously stupid move for Congressional Republicans to make? They might as well ask Barack Obama what talking points he’d most like to spend 2012 campaigning on and craft their talking points accordingly. Yes, due to both systemic and ideological reasons, the Republican Party right now is almost cultish in its detachment from reality and behavioral norms — but these are still politicians, and one has to believe that they’ll refrain from jamming the knife all the way into their own hearts.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|