Skip to comments.How the SuperCommittee Might Work to GOP Advantage (Deal Requires $1.5 trillion in spending cuts)
Posted on 08/01/2011 7:17:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The budget deal requires an additional $1.5 trillion in spending cuts to be designed by a super-committee of legislators who will propose painful recommendationsand if those recommendations arent accepted by both Houses, there will be automatic cuts to Defense and Medicare. The idea here is that Republicans will be restrained from avoiding tough choices by the supercommittee by the prospect of big defense cuts, while Democrats will feel the same way about Medicare.
Oh? So, going into an extremely nerve-wracking election season, only Republicans will care about defense spending? Defense spending has been all but sacrosanct for the past decade, and theres a reason for that: the public loves the military, its the most popular institution in America, were fighting two wars, and whatever the military wants it gets. So Democrats dont mind handing potential rivals an issue relating to their irresponsibility toward our military?
Oh, yes, they sure do and they sure will.
Similarly, its one thing for Republicans to redesign Medicare to make it more affordable; not even a conservative Republican politician wants to be held accountable for draconian across-the-board cuts.
Tonight, Barack Obama all but guaranteed the November showdown would involve tax increases (his balanced approach). At the same time, House Speaker John Boehner says changes in how the budget is calculated (the baseline) makes such tax hikes almost impossible.
But again, lets look at this practically. Democrats actually want to vote for tax increases going into an election year? The leading Democrat in the Senate, Harry Reid, certainly didnt want that even now for members of his caucus, 15 months before the election.
So, in the final analysis, the logic of the trigger in the showdown depends on Democrats not minding defense cuts and desiring tax hikes. They wont want either and will therefore be pushed in the Republican direction in the negotiations.
Zero, on the verge of a brutal 2012 political campaign, has totally demoralized and disheartened his political base.
It is this so called SuperCommittee made up of Republicans and Democrats that is going to lead this country through the same fiscal budgeting torture that it is going through right now.
Watch out for this in 2013. The GOP has negotiated themselves to a point where even if they won both houses and the presidency next year, Democrats will still have a say on how the $1.5 Trillion spending cuts get done.
can you hear the words -— REVENUE ENHANCERS ( Code for tax hokes ) and Defense Cuts?
There are literally thousands of bureaucratic monstrosities that can be cut.
Please note though, even if Zero were to be voted out next year, this deal gives the Democrats a lot of say on how the budget gets taylored when the time comes to negotiate the $1.5 Trillion spending cuts ( in 2013 ).
It is this so called SuperCommittee made up of Republicans and Democrats that is going to lead this country through the same fiscal budgeting torture that it is going through right now in the near future. It will be De Ja Vu all over again.
Watch out for this in 2013. The GOP have negotiated themselves to a point where even if they were to win both houses and the presidency next year, Democrats will still have a say on how the $1.5 Trillion spending cuts get done.
Can you hear the words - REVENUE ENHANCERS ( Code for tax hokes ) and Defense Cuts?
No they haven't. Read the details. This "Super Committee" has until Thanksgiving this year.
True. But if this debt is a serious as people say it is, we have to consider everything. I think we can cut all of the garbage out, but eventually it may have to come down to either cutting Defense/Medicare and/or raising some taxes.
I do not envy the politicans. It is easy to talk about a balance budget amendment without talking about how to actually balance it. What programs do we want and which programs don’t we want and are you willing to pay for the ones you do want? I think right now the easiest program I like is the Paul-Mack 1%.
That is a spending increase!
Make it 1.5 trlion cut each year more than the prior budget and it might mean something!
"Fiscal responsibility in our time!"
Current debt limit options allow the Administration and Congress to perpetuate a tiresome fraud on this country. The proposals discussed allow debt accumulated over 230 years to 2006 to double in six more. The media as usual provides an un-penetrating analysis abetting this alternate reality.
Alternate reality resides within a 1974 act and amendments proscribing Base Line Budgeting. The baseline budget emerges by increasing previous year appropriations for estimated inflation and enhancements to all existing programs, and then extrapolating those adjustments for ten years. The Office of Management and Budget must next score any reductions in the rate of growth in federal spending for ten years as budget cuts.
This approach can work if an organization is generally headed correctly and only minor changes in spending levels are required. However, bond rating agencies such as Moodys emphatically warn the country must reject profligate spending to retain its AAA bond rating. At the margin, the U.S. also expects the world to buy its long term bonds to finance current government expenditures dedicated over 60% to social programs and interest.
Sending a balanced budget amendment to the states and abandoning Base Line Budgeting present the only avenues out of this dilemma.
Wikipedia Baseline Budgeting
Rush Says Baseline Budgeting Makes Real Cuts Impossible in Washington
Moody’s: Neither Debt Plan Protects the Nation’s AAA Rating
RE: This “Super Committee” has until Thanksgiving this year.
Well it is even worse than I thought then. The GOP will still be the minority in the Senate and Obama still has his veto pen. What advantage does this SuperCommittee give other than to re-create this whole budget battle?
In one week or less after this the MSM will give us months of nothing but “Zero as our country’s hero”.
Any demonralization will nopt stick. It’s a travesty for REPUBs to bail the RATS out of this spending purgatory they have put us in.
REPUBs act like the Washington ____ who play the Harlem Globtrottersm, make precise moves so all the ploys work, and are there only to make the Globetrotters look invicible (and to provide extra drama in our lives). Only the Globtrotters are actually entertaining.
The voters tolerate or support military spending while they are getting their tax cuts and medical bills (Medicare) paid. That's why Bush increased all spending while cutting taxes silly, and why many Republicans defended his spending at the time.
You start messing with Medicare and you will see many voters turn on anything that doesn't benefit them personally. Ryan and CO knows/knew this, that is why their proposed medicare reform doesn't switch on till 2021 or later even though that part of it is a pretty bad idea in itself.
I am not arguing against or for the big military cuts proposed in the trigger here , but dont expect to fare well if Medicare vs Military is put as a mandated choice(short another direct attack on the US) .
Podhoretz should have pointed out that what happens depends on who the Rs put on the committee. If the Senate puts DeMint, Lee, and Paul on the committee and the House Rs put on Congressmen equally opposed to taxing, we may have a chance. If we see the likes of McCain being appointed, we have major trouble.
“Why does it always come down to Medicare and Defense?
There are literally thousands of bureaucratic monstrosities that can be cut.”
OK, I’ll bite.
Putting this clause in there was the _only way_ the Pubbies were going to get the ‘rats to agree to ANYthing.
But wait! Isn’t there a provision in the bill that states if the parties (or the supercommission, or whatever) cannot agree on where to make cuts, that automatic, ACROSS-THE-BOARD cuts will happen automatically?
Think for a moment — isn’t the latter exactly what must be done, if we are ever to get the spending and ever-mounting debt back under control?
Cut Medicare - YES!
Cut Medicaid - YES!
Cut Social Security - YES!
Cut the military - YES
Cut ObamaCare - YES!
Cut the beauracracy - YES!!!!
CUT THEM ALL!
CUT EVERY DEPARTMENT!
Isn’t that just what we, as conservatives, are shouting about?
The BEST thing that conservatives could do is (after the bill is passed) refuse to agree to any cuts at all — and let the rest happen by default (pun intended)!
As Joe Plugs would say, BFD. NOT... This all just amounts to kick the can down the road but a shorter distance this time. Maybe slight edge to GOP in the pissing match but as for enacting an effective solution fahgedaboudit.
That's the whole point...it's a continuation of the budget battle which Obama did not want.
Why? It FORCES the issue of cuts to continue to be discussed with real numbers; there is a deadline and a number target. This is a good thing.
That's a really good point. In theory, this agreement could be undone by the next congress, so this is not necessarily true, but in practice, we all know it will not be undone by the Republicans, even if they win both houses with veto-proof majorities. They don't have the family jewels to do it. So the effect is absolutely what you describe... The Democrats will still have an equal say in how the "cuts" get done.
Just like the Stupid Party to shoot themselves in the foot like that. They always do one of two things: 1) get in bed with their enemies (Yes, I called the Democrats their enemies, just like they called me their enemy), or 2) simply cave.
Let's hope there are enough patriots left in Congress to refuse to pass this monstrosity! In any case, we'll know soon enough.
Medicare is the fastest-growing program...far more than other Gov't agencies.
It's also the Dems' most treasured program. So when we try to touch it they bring up what they perceive to be the right's most treasured program...defense.
I think one thing is being overlooked when it comes to the medicare “trigger.” The “cuts” that might happen to medicare won’t affect people ON medicare, they would only happen to hospitals and doctors.
The only cuts the dems agreed to, as far as medicare is concerned, is that the PAYMENTS to doctors would be held back, or reduced.
The dems could care less about that, and the people wouldn’t care either, at least until doctors refused to accept medicare patients anymore.
So the dems have little to lose, while the GOP has everything to lose.
Boehner is a fool....
Boehner got what he said he wanted for months...cuts 1:1 to debt limit and no taxes.
He is no fool.
So if we have a super committee (Gang of 12) where does this leave my US rep? Or yours? This is not the way Congress is supposed to work. We are going to end up with 12 people dictating legislation. It will derail or ignore competing plans from Congressmen/women who are not in the Gang of 12. Plans that might be better.
RE: Cut ObamaCare - YES!
NO, ELIMINATE IT TOTALLY.
no taxes? Just wait for the commission, every democrat on it will demand higher taxes.
Boehner IS a fool...
Sure, just as Obama did this time around. But he failed to get it which is why the left is so angry at him. And Obama didn't win the tax debate either when he signed the Bush tax cut extension. So why are you so negative and so sure they'll win that debate next time around?
Meanwhile our side will be demanding more cuts. One side has to convince at least one member on the other side in order for anything to come to the floor. Obama doesn't want the debate which is why he didn't want this new committee. He knows he'll lose.