SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER's Powerpoint On The DEAL

www.speaker.gov/UploadedFiles/3-7-31-11-Debt-Framework-Boehner.pdf ^ | Updated: July 31, 10:35pm EST | Speaker John Boehner

[Yosemitest]

Speaker John Boehner's Powerpoint On The Deal


TWO-STEP APPROACH TO HOLD PRESIDENT OBAMA ACCOUNTABLE

Emerging framework has three main features:

(1) cuts government spending more than it increases the debt limit;
(2) implements spending caps to restrain future spending;
(3) advances the cause of a Balanced Budget Amendment

Framework accomplishes this without tax hikes, which would destroy jobs, while preventing a job-killing national default.

NO TAX HIKES

‣ Same as House-passed bill, the framework includes no tax hikes.
‣ Under the framework, the Joint Committee of Congress will work off a current-law baseline, as required by the 1974 Budget Act, effectively making it impossible for Joint Committee to increase taxes.

CUTS THAT EXCEED THE DEBT HIKE

‣ Same as House-passed bill, framework includes spending cuts that exceed the amount of the increased debt authority granted to POTUS.
‣Would cut & cap discretionary spending immediately, saving $917B over 10 years (certified by CBO) & raise the debt ceiling by less – $900B – to approximately February.
‣ Before debt ceiling can be raised, Congress and the president must enact spending cuts of a larger amount first.

CAPS TO CONTROL FUTURE SPENDING

‣As in House-passed bill, framework imposes spending caps that would set clear limits on future spending & serve as barrier against gov’t expansion while economy grows.
‣Failure to remain below these caps triggers automatic across the board cuts (“sequestration”). Same mechanism used in 1997 Balanced Budget Agreement.

BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT

‣ Same as House-passed bill, framework requires both House & Senate to vote on a BBA after Oct. 1, 2011 but before the end of year.
‣ Similar to House-passed bill, framework authorizes POTUS to request second tranche of debt limit increase of $1.5T if:
‣ Joint Committee cuts spending by greater amount than the requested debt limit hike,
OR
‣ A Balanced Budget Amendment is sent to the states.

‣ Creates incentive for previous opponents of a BBA to now support it.

ENTITLEMENT REFORMS & SAVINGS

‣ Same as House-passed bill, framework creates a 12-member Joint Committee required to report legislation by November 23, 2011 that would produce a proposal to reduce the deficit by at least $1.5T over 10 years.
‣ Each chamber would consider Joint Committee proposal on an up-or-down basis without any amendments by December 23, 2011.
‣ If Joint Committee’s proposal is enacted OR if a Balanced Budget Amendment is sent to the states, POTUS would be authorized to request a debt limit increase of $1.5T.

ENTITLEMENT REFORMS & SAVINGS

‣ Sets up a new sequestration process to cut spending across-the-board – and ensure that any debt limit increase is met with greater spending cuts – IF Joint Committee fails to achieve at least $1.2T in deficit reduction.
‣ If this happens, POTUS may request up to $1.2T for a debt limit increase, and if granted, then across-the-board spending cuts would result that would equal the difference between $1.2T and the deficit reduction enacted as a result of Joint Committee.
‣ Across-the-board spending cuts would apply to FYs 2013-2021, and apply to both mandatory & discretionary programs.
‣ Total reductions would be equally split between defense and non-defense programs. Across-the-board cuts would also apply to Medicare. Other programs, including Social Security, Medicaid, veterans, and civil & military pay, would be exempt.
‣ Sequestration process is designed to guarantee that Congress acts on the Joint Committee’s legislation to cut spending.

[sickoflibs]

Worth reading for this weeks hot debate!

Spending cuts are not till 2013 given to next congress non-binding after the (Obama) election.

There still has to be (or should be) a FY12 budget passed BTW for October 1. Another set of CRs coming?

[SampleMan]

Let’s see. My wife is spending $80,000 more than we make and has hit our credit limit.

Solution? I agree to get a credit limit extension for another $80k, if she’ll reduce her plans to increase her spending from $160k to only $155k.

Oh yea, great deal.

[kittymyrib]

Why don’t we trust the Republican leadership? Sen. Corker (R-TN) said this morning on CNBC that the real total of spending cuts would “probably be $40-50 BILLION,” because the Boehner deal only obligates this Congress to try to cut the budget. Future Congresses are not bound by anything this Congress does.

The same vanishing spending cuts happened in last December’s budget deal, when Boehner’s billions in cuts shrank to millions. So again, the GOP will give Obama and the Dems the money they want to buy votes with for next year’s election, and the spending cuts are practically nil. No wonder sane people don’t trust these scam artists.

[stockpirate]

This bill allows for the Bush tax rates to expire, which is a tax increase......

[zeugma]

The “cuts” they are talking about would have more meaning if they were not talking in ‘baseline budgeting’ terms. As is, it’s a sham and charade.

[San Jacinto]

I know Reid wanted to slip a provision in the bill that would excuse his refusal to present a budget for the next two years. I don’t know if he got it. I wish the Pubs would make more of a point of it, perhaps even stirring up another “crisis” when futire CR’s come up. We need a dim budget on the table for the purpose of next year’s election campaigns.

Secondly, I am amused at all the reasons this compromise bill is a “failure”, “sellout”, etc>:

It did not make a one-year cut of $1.2 Trillion from the budget THIS year.
It did not make permanent the Bush Tax cuts.
It did not abolish base line budgeting.
It did not compel PASSAGE of a BBA.

Anyone who thinks those things were remotely possible this year lives on Planet “Head UP the Ass”

Anyone who thinks those things a possible at ANYTIME in the future better get started buildiing the Republican numbers in the House, Senate and White House— and not just any Republican, but the most conservative ones electable. We’ve got a shot to move in that direction 15 months from right now.

[org.whodat]

Another Cr cave, dang, we know what will happen there.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Secondly, I am amused at all the reasons this compromise bill is a “failure”, “sellout”, etc>:
It did not make a one-year cut of $1.2 Trillion from the budget THIS year.
It did not make permanent the Bush Tax cuts.
It did not abolish base line budgeting.
It did not compel PASSAGE of a BBA.
Anyone who thinks those things were remotely possible this year lives on Planet “Head UP the Ass”

I am much more realistic than many when it comes to the current political realities of single House control, so I am not dwelling on those myself. My big problem is delaying the cuts till 2013 AFTER the election and non-binding on the next congress. That is standard political cowardliness and helps Obama get re-elected which is why he wants it.

[sickoflibs]

RE :"Anyone who thinks those things a possible at ANYTIME in the future better get started buildiing the Republican numbers in the House, Senate and White House— and not just any Republican, but the most conservative ones electable. We’ve got a shot to move in that direction 15 months from right now."

That is a point I have been making too. And any cuts put into law now can be easily reversed by a Speaker Pelosi if the plan is to lose the election in 2012(worst case).

[San Jacinto]

And I am more realistic than some in rating the current compromise. It doesn’t do squat in addressing the debt crisis we are now facing. Worse, it relies on those same old gimmicks to create the image of spending restraint— non-binding “cuts” in the rate of spending GROWTH, cementing in bigger deficits year after year, relying on the 18th “commission” to reign in spending after 17 miserable failures with the same fix, and then labeling those few who actually want to fix the problem as some kind of lunatic fringe.

My point is that the real problem will be faced in the real world in one of two ways: (1) We get a solid majority of conservatives in all the political units or (2)after a total financial collapse followed by 10 or 20 years of who knows what, something else will emerge.

Maybe the odds are strongly against (1), but the alternative forces us to try.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”My point is that the real problem will be faced in the real world in one of two ways: (1) We get a solid majority of conservatives in all the political units or (2)after a total financial collapse followed by 10 or 20 years of who knows what, something else will emerge.”

And I have seen a number of posters calling for #2 which would be a disaster if it had the GOp name on it.

I posted on another thread that the House should sent the Senate a $50B debt extension so House Republicans can improve this bill to get more of their votes, I know it's risky business but passing this deal 'as is' helps Obama get re-elected, few voters will care what he originally demanded in this, just as few voters cared that Clinton originally opposed a BB when voting in 1996.

[trickamsterdam]

Actually, passing the version of the BBA (e.g. requires 2/3 majority to raise taxes, caps spending at 18% of GDP, I believe) that was in CCB is not remotely possible at any time in the foreseeable future, not just right now.

Even if republicans took ten senate seats (they won't) they would still need to get ten democrats to come on board. None of them ever, ever will for that version of the BBA. I doubt you even get moderate to liberal republicans like S. Brown or O. Snowe on board, they only voted for CCB because in wasn't highly publicized and they knew it wouldn't pass (IMO).

Now a straight version of the BBA is possible, and might have even been possible now if they hadn't wasted all that time on CCB and the Paul Ryan plan. So I'm not sure the establishment republicans were the only ones running a con. Conservatives wasted precious time on symbolic legislation.

But anyway, I agree w/ your basic point: many people here need a reality check (or simply need to read the constitution and understand how hard it is to amend the constitution).

[San Jacinto]

I agree with you that passage of BBA is very unlikely in foreseeable future. Also, I don’t think there is any scenario where it could have passed this year. (Parenthetically, I would add that the BBA cure can be worse than the disease unless it is very carefully drafted.)

However, when the vote is taken this year on the BBA - and I hope it is a well drafted version— some of those 23 dim senators up for reelection are going to have to vote against it. If that helps next November, then good. If it doesn’t help—se la vie.

[San Jacinto]

Good posts, Yosemitest, very helpful.

[Yosemitest]

"If you get time and are interested, read about
“nonpolitical politics” and Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia
(before the Czech Republic)."

Here's what I found.

Living in Truth: A wise, quirky memoir from Václav Havel, 6 July 2007 by Daniel J. Mahoney

A Politician Needs Principles and Good Manners, By Vaclav Havel (October, 1991)

Velvet president: why Vaclav Havel is our era's George Orwell and more. By Matt Welch 2003

Václav Havel: From a political dissident to a dissident politician

Three Vaclavs, Central Europe Review Vol 1, No 10, on 30 August 1999

Is there any better sources that you might recommend?

[Yosemitest]

"If you get time and are interested, read about
“nonpolitical politics” and Vaclav Havel in Czechoslovakia
(before the Czech Republic)."

P.S. I also found this:

Economic Transformation in the Czech Republic: Challenges Faced and Lessons Learned; 2/21/2006 by Václav Klaus

[wildbill]

There is no deal. The Republicans only think they have a deal.

Experience has shown that the Democrats do not keep their word on deals.

They are like Lucy with the football, telling Charlie Brown to trust her that this time she won’t pull the football out of the way.

[longtermmemmory]

The CBO has already discredited points one and two.

AND

there are now multiple versions of the balanced budget amendment floating around.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I think Boehner knows the Democrats will not follow through with this deal. My guess is that he thinks that the refusal to make promised spending cuts will backfire badly on the President and Democrats next summer, and tell the American people they can't be trusted to cut spending.

I think Boehner all along never believed that real cuts were going to happen, and so has been using this entire crisis to set things up for 2012. Including the vote on the balanced budget. He knows it will go down, but he really wants to get Democrats on record as having voted against it, becasuse it tends to be extremely popular with voters.

Whehter or not all this has the desired political effect next fall remains to be seen.

[familyop]

"Is there any better sources that you might recommend?"

I'm sorry, but I lost the electronic files containing academic papers on the topic nearly ten years ago. Those were from a team of global history/economics consultants who traveled much and contracted to corporations and government offices in several western culture countries.

...will try to dredge up a little dim memory here.

Generally, in Czech and Poland, political and ideological constructs of the elite were countered with refusals to think, speak or willingly participate on their terms and terminologies. We know what is right in thought and speech, and that's what we'll practice in our private interactions. As for public interactions, those are simply avoided.

And as for material support, that is slowed, until the desired results are accomplished (clear field for participation of better leadership). That's why avenues of self-sufficiency are already being denied by the elite (recent attempt to effectively abolish small farming operations and many other regulatory and social measures).

All who want to survive the historical perennial growth of stubbornness against kleptocracy must become as self-sufficient as possible. But that trend tends to shrink revenues to those in power, and they try to react somewhat in advance (historically unsuccessfully).

It also helps to indulge younger members of ruling parties in Bohemian pleasures; it keeps them occupied, and their parents, inflamed and ineffective. ...and other peaceful measures. Young people who are generally more socially traditional can be the leaders of tomorrow.