Skip to comments.White House, Republicans Strike Tenative Deal To Raise Debt Ceiling
Posted on 07/30/2011 8:21:33 PM PDT by Beaten Valve
ABC News has learned that Republicans and the White House have struck a tenative deal to raise the debt ceiling before the Aug. 2 deadline.
It's not done yet, but here is the framework of the tentative deal they have worked out, according to a source familiar with the negotiations:
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
Don't like me calling you out on your incessant negativity and demoralizing posts, eh? I'll bet you'd like for me to just disappear, but you're out of luck, pal. I'm not going anywhere, and if you keep up the doom and gloom on every thread you post to, I'm going to make a bigger noise about it.
Or you could just scroll past my posts.
I did that, Terry. Dozens upon dozens of times, until I just couldn't read another one without objecting. You hit my last nerve, friend.
I, and most Freepers, are in this for blood. We want to get our country back on track, and we know we've got the fight of our lives ahead of us to get there. Incessant, demoralizing posts such as yours do nothing to harden the resolve of the troops. They do just the opposite. Which is precisely what the enemy wants.
Now do you understand my objection?
The BBA may go down in flames, but everyone will know who voted for and against.
When the only candidates being offered are either outright liberals or fake conservatives the outcome is already decided. Liberals win, either with the mask on, or the mask off. Pick your poison.
“If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.”
A lot will have to be explained/clarified. Who decides what the “automatic across-the-board cuts” will be? I think we all know that, ultimately, there really will have to be cuts in all areas to get back on the right track. And, as Allen West introduced in a bill that passed unanimously, there is a lot of waste to pursue in the DOD. (Medicare/Medicaid waste, fraud and abuse also make up many billions of $). But if cuts would be truly across the board, then that should mean throughout government.
Most critical is just who’ll make those decisions (the fatal flaw of McConnell’s plan was that it gave BHO blanket power to decide where to make cuts) - AND who will comprise the Committee.
I’d love to see a stipulation that only those who are up for re-election could serve on it. That’d guarantee some safeguards right there!
They ARE sneaking in the possibility of tax increases. If he House Pubs don’t kill this provision, it will come back to haunt them.
Amen to both comments. In lots of ways I'm madder than last week. Didn't think that was possible. . What a mess. . November 6, 2012 can't come soon enough.
Well, actually we have. But I don't expect you to know anything about that.
The assassinations thing I'll just chuckle at, because it's such a silly straw man.
Maybe it won't pass the first time or the second but we need to have the conversation out there. We can make it an issue in 2012 we can make the RATs wear it.
While we are at it we can do a cap bill too and that doesn't need a 2/3 majority. Just doing CCB in stages.
I’m just watching these threads fascinated by how many GOP hacks have come out of the woodwork on FR tonight trying to put perfume on this stinking pile of manure. Many of them screen names I’ve never ever seen posting here before.
Plus a vote on the BBA. Yes it’ll fail but it puts everyone on the record and people will still be pissed come election time over it.
Considering the reps only hold 1/3rd of the government, this isn’t that bad of a deal. I do wish they would have held for a limit so Obama would have to go through this during mid-2012.
Let’s see the details but if this is true, Boehner and the TEA-party related reps did well.
CCB would have raised the debt ceiling #2.4 TRILLION. Why would anyone want to do it in stages?
Maybe it won't pass the first time or the second but we need to have the conversation out there.
If the Republicans had wanted a balanced budget they had it right in front of them. All they had to do was nothing. Don't raise the debt ceiling.
So, the rest of the charade impresses me not at all.
I agree with you. We don’t control the Senate OR the White House (yet :-), but we got Reid and BHO to give up quite a lot considering what they first demanded.
And when it comes to the BBA concession, they will rue the day.
I don’t know why they don’t increase the % of salaries that can have social security deducted up from the 90% level of about $108,000. I’ll bet a lot of those Wall Street guys who were making salaries with commissions of $600,000 a year in the housing bubble days wish that they had that money socked away in their SS fund now that they are unemployed.
"To isolate the real root of the U.S. fiscal problem, one need only tally the growth rates of key figures since 1950, starting with the biggest increase and ending with the smallest: federal spending (+88 times), interest on the national debt (+74 times), the federal debt (+55 times), federal tax revenues (+54 times), nominal GDP (+49 times), inflation (+8 times), and population (+1.4 times). Was it really necessary that federal outlays increase 88 times since 1950, equivalent to 63 times population growth, 10 times the inflation rate, and 2 times the economys growth rate? Was it conducive to our prosperity? No. Was it moral? I think not."
So, . . when do we confront this?
It better be soon, Art. You can only undermine foundations so far before the building collapses.
‘Pick your poison.’
I pick elections. Do what you want with violence and murder.
Are you really that bereft of arguments that you have to stoop to such silly straw men?
Wrong.. not only are there tax increases but cuts will be spread out over 10 years...in other words there won't be any spending cuts.
Here, according to Democratic and Republican sources, are the key elements:
A debt ceiling increase of up to $2.1 to $2.4 trillion (depending on the size of the spending cuts agreed to in the final deal). They have now agreed to spending cuts of roughly $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
The formation of a special Congressional committee to recommend further deficit reduction of up to $1.6 trillion (whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase). This deficit reduction could take the form of spending cuts, tax increases or both .
The special committee must make recommendations by late November (before Congress' Thanksgiving recess).
If Congress does not approve those cuts by December 23, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare. This "trigger" is designed to force action on the deficit reduction committee's recommendations by making the alternative painful to both Democrats and Republicans. A vote, in both the House and Senate, on a balanced budget amendment.
Great post! As good an explanation of the problem to our idiot liberal family members, friends, and neighbors as any I have seen.
The one thing we didn’t get was for it to be a short-term deal, with BHO having to come back again in Dec. or Jan. and go through this all again. My guess is Boehner had to trade that to get the very important BBA vote (in a timely manner, too!) concession.
I think time will prove that we got the better end of this trade. Before this year, most folks paid no attention to raising the debt ceiling anyway. But this BBA issue can become a Big F***ing Deal, as Plugs Biden would say.
Not to worry, there’ll be LOTS to vilify BHO for between now and Nov. ‘12.
This is a *tentative* framework. It better be VERY tentative because they have left open the possibilitr for raising taxes here, but they relegated it to a committee, This is a poison pill and needs to be addressed before anything comes out as an actual bill. The thing is, if they remove the possibility for raisng taxes, will the dems and the white hut still go for it?
The rest of it doesn’t look EVIL, but there IS enough crap and crap agencies in the federal government that SHOULD be completely eliminated or at least defunded that NO debt ceiling increase is necessary...and that should be a priority for the next election if we take the senate and the whitehouse.
I would take this, ugly as it is, for NOW. but when primary time and election time rolls around, this better be on the agenda to be altered beyond belief.
Political power is distributed either through elections, as in the US, or by violence. as under Stalin and Mao Tse Tung. The choice is between effectively participating in the electoral process, surrendering to the enemy, or engaging in violence. You have openly opposed effective participation in the electoral process in this thread, and for years on FR. You have criticized me and others for being concerned with gaining votes. Better fighting for votes than fighting with guns and bombs. Those are the only alternatives.
‘This deficit reduction could take the form of spending cuts, tax increases or both’
My understanding of the proposal is that the part of your quote after ‘spending cuts’ is not part of the agreement. If your quote is correct, it would change my position, and also would mean large numbers of defectors in the House GOP. I guess we need to read the bill.
THIS election is the most important election I will have participated in in my lifetime. I am not calling for a war, but we ARE in a nonshooting war right here right now. We MUST win this election because our country cannot take another year, let alone four years of this. They will not give up power so easily. I believe they are fully capable and fully prepared to do violence, and we had better be ready for it.
Pure bunkum. You’re really desperate, aren’t you.
Amen. Very well said.
| Clearly, you cannot cut government by giving it more ability to borrow and spend. I don't think it is possible for this country to have a more sorry bunch of losers running the show.
Again, cut, cut, cut.
An arrogant Marxist was spending Trillions of bucks without comprehending. The piss-stream media concurred Without saying a negative word For the Republic they thought was ending.
‘Youre really desperate, arent you.’
Criticism from a political Eunuch — what a laugh.
“dont like the medicare cuts only because the Dems will use this in the election, but then, the Dems own this too.”
We’ve GOT to start running commercials (and often) like the Dems and AARP ad propaganda regarding Medicare cuts. All we have to do is tell the public (most of whom aren’t aware, I assure you) that Obamacare will cut $500B from Medicare benefits, drive current and future doctors from the profession, and force rationing of care, even denial of many (currently available) procedures for the elderly starting in 2013.
We need to wake them up to just how scary the truth of this law is before it’s too late. That alone would be a real game-changer in the election (even younger voters care about their parents and grandparents).
Says a guy defending sellout Congressmen who don’t have a pair between them.
Your analogy is flawed because with the banking regulations set forth in this country, the bank can say you’re crazy for asking for a loan you won’t be able to pay back. Even though they know you might be a credit risk because they’re able to look at your credit history. They can’t turn you down because the federal government and it’s asinine banking laws says so.
“Guarantee BBA goes to the states or no debt ceiling increase.”
Constitution says an amendment has to first be voted on and passed by 2/3 of congress (both houses, I believe), then go to the states and be passed.
But don’t think the voters won’t be watching how these politicians vote on it. All the House and over a third of the Senate have to get re-elected next year, so the BBA has an excellent chance of passing. The states, for obvious reasons, should be a sure thing. The people WANT this.
What about that is rocket science?
“So why should no tax increase on this supposed agreement be considered some sort of victory for our side or America?”
Because BHO himself wanted tax increases so badly. He pushed it daily in his lectures (I mean speeches :-)
Hey, nobody said he lives in reality. He just wanted what he wanted - and that also included NO CUTS. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz said it herself. And THAT little soundbite should be used as often as possible in Republican campaigns.
“I pick elections. Do what you want with violence and murder.”
He used a similar dopey argument like this against me, EV.
I have been defending being concerned about elections. All politicians are the natural enemy of a free people, and can never be trusted. It is necessary to have their gonads in your hands at all times to keep them in line.
Just laugh at him.
Oh, I have been laughing. :-)
‘He used a similar dopey argument like this against me, EV.’
It is not nice to lie about what I said on the same page on the same thread. See my posts, quoted by you in #307 and posted by me in #327. As anyone who can read can easily see, it is not similar to my posts to EV. Try again, sucker.
No tax increase is a big deal because it was a trap. If the republicans fell for the “balanced approach” and “shared sacrifice” b.s. the base would have stayed home in 2012. Further, all the tea party voters would turn on the congressmen they got elected.
The rinos are dumb enough to have fallen for it. The tea party cabal saved the establishment’s rear end by holding the line on this.
“It is not nice to lie about what I said on the same page on the same thread. See my posts, quoted by you in #307 and posted by me in #327. As anyone who can read can easily see, it is not similar to my posts to EV. Try again, sucker.”
I said in an earlier comment that if there weren’t any real cuts in the near-term that the plan was useless. Then, in a bizarre argument relying solely upon hyperbole (much in the same manner of accusing EV of wanting “violence” for disagreeing with you), you accused me of supporting massive tax increases. (Comment 270). Give it up already.
New tagline ...
Lets just do nothing; things'll just work themselves out...
according to the link we got screwed again.
Since you don’t seem to know that the President has been pressing for large tax increases even up to today, and that was the alternative to the current proposal, there is no point in discussion with someone who refuses to see the real world.
"even if spending was $2 trillion less than that now scheduled in the baseline, as proposed this week by Republican House Speaker John Boehner, it would still total $43.8 trillion, or 55% above last decades spending level. Since Senate Democrats vow to veto Boehners plan, spending will rise by at least 50% in the coming decade."
That is the truth of it. There are no cuts. They are looking for a political solution. None of what they have been doing for the past week is an actual solution, especially without entitlements and Obamacare on the table.
Even the Ryan plan spends more money.
Rand Paul's Penny Plan is the only thing out there that decreases the deficit. They are solving the wrong problem, as usual.