Skip to main content

View Diary: Super Congress talks about punting: Spending cuts now, maybe taxes later (165 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Okay, just so I've got this straight. (5+ / 0-)

    The underlying point of the Super Committee in the first place was that a normal consensus couldn't be reached, so they kicked the can down the road to this committee.
    Now the committee they kicked the can down the road to, is itself kicking the can down the road?
    Sounds something like compound interest on bullshit, or something.

    •  remember why it was created (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Time Waits for no Woman

      because the GOP held the country hostage on the debt ceiling.  If the SC fails, all that's left are triggers that are not binding, so the net result is a clean debt ceiling rise.  If something that 51 Senate democrats could vote for passes, there's an off chance it might be worth doing.  The whole supercommittee, in other words, was never designed to screw Democrats -- it was designed to save John Boehner from his own caucus.  

      The immediate consequence, in fact, is the House and Senate now have to vote on medicare cuts standing alone -- that's exactly what the Republicans don't want to happen.  Once you accept that voting for a bill in subcommittee is no indication one likes the bill, it actually makes democrats look kinda smart.  And if I'm wrong and they do pass these cuts, the opportunity for outrage will be at that point, not at this stage in the process.

      "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

      by Loge on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 10:30:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Explain? (0+ / 0-)

        How does this mean they have to vote for medicare cuts on a standalone basis?

        •  the supercommittee charter (0+ / 0-)

          basically says whatever they decide on, if it's within the rules (and now that you mention it, this might not be), gets an up-or-down vote.  Basically, they came up with a set of cuts nobody wanted and sent the supercommittee to come up with better ones/revenue increases.  So, anything the SC reports out goes to the floor, but with no amendments or filibuster.  I'm assuming the details will build on the last reported dem proposal, which had some small medicare cuts, none to social security, and some other templates for cuts to discretionary spending, just without tax increases.  Assuming this is enough to justify an up-or-down vote, they'll do it, and I think it'll fail.  Even if it doesn't, it goes to Obama, but the lack of tax increases is the perfect excuse to veto even if it passes -- someone cynical enough to vote against the 99% is also cynical enough to take out positions he or she doesn't mean.  

          The great thing is the triggers are also bullshit, so from day one both sides weren't trying to get a deal but positioning to the election.  We'll only know if it's smart or stupid if it comes to a floor vote and how the democrats vote then.  It's insane, though to think this congress can appropriate for future ones.

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 10:42:30 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well okay then. (0+ / 0-)
        And if I'm wrong and they do pass these cuts, the opportunity for outrage will be at that point, not at this stage in the process.
        I sure don't want my outrage to be premature, such as when I read about what caused it in the first place.  
        •  what caused what? (0+ / 0-)

          how far back are you going to take this?  We're really only in this position because of medicare cuts Obama wouldn't agree to in the first place when they were first proposing the debt ceiling bill.  So, when push came to shove, the Democrats did the right thing -- and they could easily have justified caving in the face of economic calamity.  

          And what will have "caused" anything is a final vote, not a committee vote that I am still convinced is on a bill that's designed to fail so each side points fingers at the other.   I thought that when the debt limit bill passed, and I think that now.  The point is these negotiations tell us absolutely nothing about what will pass and what Obama will sign.  

          Failure to work out a bill that would be acceptable to democrats was how this started, and that remains the default -- anything good that would have come out of the SC would have been nice, but there was no reason to expect anything to come out of it.  For the simple reason of why would anyone be more likely to make a deal in November than August, when at least in August there was the risk of default.  

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 10:56:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not taking this anywhere. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SadieB

            Or any further, for that matter.
            As knowledgeable as your comments are, you might want to consider that other people get fed up at different stages of this exasperating legislative dance, which I am perfectly in my right to do so.

      •  Your History Is Wrong (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SadieB, apimomfan2

        The Obama Catfood Commission came along first. Also I'd say people should get outrage BEFORE legilsation is passed, not afterward as by that point it will already be too late.

        •  this has nothing to do (0+ / 0-)

          with the commission, and the legislation hasn't hit the floor much less had a whip count.  The issue here, in fact, is that significant elements of what were in the bowles-simpson proposal would be absent here.  what's more, we're only in this position because the very proposal that is supposedly coming out of the supercommittee is similar to one Obama rejected in debt limit negotiations.    wouldn't that have been the time to pass it, when the choice was that or default?

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 11:32:09 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "...by that point it will already be too late." (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          apimomfan2

          That's the way some people want it.  :(

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (132)
  • Community (65)
  • Media (32)
  • Elections (32)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (31)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Law (28)
  • Environment (28)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Culture (25)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Hillary Clinton (23)
  • Republicans (22)
  • Climate Change (21)
  • Science (21)
  • Labor (20)
  • Economy (19)
  • Josh Duggar (18)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site