Skip to main content

View Diary: The Left's Sequester Leverage (299 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  it seems to me that...the Senate would be (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Creosote, WineRev

    far better off to pass several separate pieces of legislation that the House could, therefore, have no reason not to act on: a) a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling with nothing else included; b) a bill to cut $100 billion from the budget, including the oil subsidies and other corporate welfare, such the out-of-control defense spending on private sector military contractors, a couple of weapons systems that the Pentagon says it neither wants nor needs; c) a bill cutting the two percent out of Medicare by authorizing the system to negotiate drug prices with drug companies on behalf of all Medicare recipients, as a group; d) a bill raising revenue by eliminating the Bush tax cuts on those making more than $250,000 (right now, it's $400,000 for individuals based on the bill just passed).

    That would give the House everything it needed to act. If it failed to raise the debt ceiling, John Boehner and his fellow incompetent Republicans would be solely to blame.

    •  Such a move (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wdrath

      by the Senate would indeed put the House in one hell of a box.
      I particularly liked d), bringing BACK the $250,000 threshold. Just because that chip was tossed on the table in the last hand doesn't mean we have to accept that the result is "permanent" "fixed" "eternal" or whatever other terms have been used lately.

      I would also add e) remove the cap on Social Security for wages and salaries (current law, capped at $113K; a significant reason Warren Buffet's secretary pays more federal taxes in toto than Warren does.) But I would also include dividends, interest and capital gains income (which is MOST of the income for high earners) with a healthy (say, $75,000) exemption so lower and middle income folk who get some of their income (esp. in retirement) from these sources wouldn't be dinged.
            If passed, this would take Social Security out of any budget discussions for decades (the SSA says just removing the cap moves the benefit reduction date back from 2038 to 2081---at which point none of us on these boards will be around to care.) AND, by including dividends and capital gains, allow us to RAISE benefits beyond the current "scrape by from month to month" mode.

      Good ideas though..

      Shalom.

      "God has given wine to gladden the hearts of people." Psalm 104:15

      by WineRev on Sat Jan 05, 2013 at 06:55:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  raising the cap on Social Security would be great (0+ / 0-)

        but...doesn't that violate the pledge of Democrats not to include Social Security as part of this? Republicans are always itching to find every way they possibly can to try to kill off Social Security...even mentioning any changes to the program, even beneficial ones, may not be such a great idea as part of a debt ceiling/fiscal cliff effort...

        ...although....now that you mention it...passing it as a stand-alone bill...could also put Republicans in a further bind by giving them everything they've demanded...including Social Security "reform" (unfortunately, their definition of Social Security "reform" and our definintion of Social Security "reform" are completely different...their definition means to try to kill it off or at least diminish it...ours is to strengthen it).

        Good idea.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (141)
  • Community (69)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Elections (37)
  • 2016 (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Climate Change (30)
  • Culture (29)
  • Environment (29)
  • Science (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Media (21)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Spam (18)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • International (15)
  • White House (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site