President Obama says agreement will cut about $1 trillion over 10 years

[Hissyspit]

Source: Associated Press

Obama, Congress reach a debt deal

07/31/2011 9:21 PM DAVID ESPO
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Ending a perilous stalemate, President Barack Obama announced agreement Sunday night with Republican congressional leaders on a compromise to avoid the nation's first-ever financial default. The deal would cut more than $2 trillion from federal spending over a decade.

Default "would have had a devastating effect on our economy," Obama said at the White House, relaying the news to the American people and financial markets around the world. He thanked the leaders of both parties.

- snip -

In a conference call with his rank and file, Boehner said the agreement "isn't the greatest deal in the world, but it shows how much we've changed the terms of the debate in this town."

Obama underscored that point. He said that, if enacted, the agreement would mean "the lowest level of domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower was president" more than a half century ago.

Read more: http://m.philly.com/phillycom/pm_21412/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=GjYrZ4DJ

[pinboy3niner]

1. CNN: President to make major statement within next 15 minutes nt

[Brickbat]

2. Flash? FFS.

Back in my day...grumble, grumble...

*puts on editor's visor, chomps on cigar, takes a swig of whiskey, yells at the intern...*

[Robb]

19. Ah, the days of beating interns with pica poles.

:toast:

[Brickbat]

23. Heh.

:toast: backatcha, sir!

[No Elephants]

41. Mr. White, is that you? Mr. Grant? Ted???

[baldguy]

3. How far has Obama caved?

Will the recession last an extra ten yrs, or only 5?

[HereSince1628]

5. I think it's for the benefit of Asian markets...

but I'm just one of those kernels getting ground into dust by the big wheels in DC

[aquart]

8. Yah. We wouldn't want them to have a recession.

[No Elephants]

44. He did not get half the cuts he wanted. He just has to stop caving to House Democrats.

Oh, wait.

[dixiegrrrrl]

4. got an online link so I can hear it?

[Altoid_Cyclist]

6. From Planes, trains and automobiles is this very appropriate line:

You're F***ed!!

It's game, set, match and championship to the repukes and the corporations.

But hey....I'm sure that we the people will win the next one..right?? Better cue the flying pigs.

[guitar man]

7. I wonder how bad we got fucked nt

[Fuddnik]

10. Imagine the worst and double it.

It's been a pretty good yardstick so far.

[on point]

9. Hey! The EXACT same amount as letting the Bush tax ripoff for the wealthy expire!!

[libmom74]

11. Well isn't that interesting.

[workinclasszero]

12. How bad did Seniors and the middle class get screwed?

I'm afraid to hear the details tbh.

[rucky]

13. We won't really know until after it passes. n/t

[No Elephants]

42. I think the middle class may have gotten it worse.

Two things Seniors do with a good amount of predictablity--at least where I live.

1/ Vote.

2/ Support their own lobbyist.


Say what you will about how corrupt AARP is--and I am starting to get that and agree--it ran ads on behalf of seniors (and that will also benefit disabled people and children of deceased workers, all of whom can collect OASDI, subject to having the right amount of quarters worked).

Yeah, AARP's generally pro-Democratic bent caused AARP to stumble about supporting the cuts for a second, but the loud blowback from AARP members got AARP denying and backpedaling very quickly.

[Cool Logic]

14. Well, I imagine he is feeling pretty good...

$1 trillion over 10 years ain't much of a cut and he gets S2.6 trillion immediately.

$2.6t - ($1t / 10) = $2.5t net.

[totodeinhere]

15. OK everybody, bend over and prepare to get screwed. The fix is in.

Trillions in cuts in a time of recession and no tax increases or revenue enhancements, and no guarantee that we will have tax increases in the future. There is even no mention of the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Fuck, fuck, fuck.

[Leontius]

16. $100 billion a year is about half of what needs to be cut from

the Defense dept.

[No Elephants]

43. That probably doesn't even cover private sector contractor price gouging.

Beoing, Halliburton, Bechtel, Blackwater, etc.

[workinclasszero]

17. We have what? 3 unfunded wars going on at once..

Hundreds of unneeded overseas military bases. I thought I read that Afghanistan costs us 10 billon a month and we been there 10 freakin years! The bush tax cuts for the rich are still in effect and the biggest and richest us corporations still pay NO TAXES!

The fascist tea party rethugs got EVERY DAMN THING they demanded!

Is this what our President is going to call a victory??

Next time they will demand the end of SS and Medicare and I fear our democratic President will gladly hand it over to them!

We are fucked...

[Altoid_Cyclist]

21. Let's not forget that some people here will claim victory in the name of pragmatism.

On the other hand; a knife in the back is still a knife in the back even if it does have a presidential seal.

We have been baited, hooked, fought, landed, gutted and turned into catfood. Thank goodness the catfood commission was created. We will now have a chance to serve our true purpose.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[No Elephants]

45. We really need to focus more on what is going on in D.C. than on what is going on at DU.

[Altoid_Cyclist]

87. You're correct.

It just gets real tiresome when we're constantly told that we're just not bright enough to see the intellectual brilliance being displayed by President Obama.

I might be wrong about this, but I really don't see how this is going to end well for the majority of Americans.

[unkachuck]

24. "The fascist tea party rethugs got EVERY DAMN THING they demanded!"

....it's the power of the primary....we should be impressed and encouraged with the power the baggers are wielding within the puke caucus, puke party and Congress in total disproportion to their numbers....this too will be our blueprint for our one-issue Progressive fighters....

....from now on, EVERY DINO must be massively primaried and one of our Progressives installed....instead of tax breaks for the filthy rich and endless war, we will lock-up and shut-down this government until we get Medicare for all....if they can do it, we can do it....

[Igel]

33. Hardly.

People haven't been paying attention.

[No Elephants]

46. Agree in part, but

Parties are powerful and both Republicans and Democrats protect incumbents and the Democratic Party has morphed into the DKC (which is why the DLC no longer needes to be active).

Given the way both Parties protect themselves from third party challenges, the Tea Party is an aberration. The Koch brothers have been brewing that one since the 1980's and have used their money and contacts to support it. That is the only reason, IMO, that the Tea Party took hold so much faster and stronger than, say, the Green Party was ever able to manage. That, and the church infrastructure that riles up the RW three times a week and twice on Sunday.

Should we try our best to primary DINO's? You bet. But we have to ken what we are up against as well.

Maybe we need to unite with the Democrats' best weapon so far? Unions. They are the only thing Demx have comparable to the neo theo church network. Jusst a thought.

[Historic NY]

18. Well whoopie doo.......10 yrs by then it will be higher.

[quakerboy]

20. Other article says 2 Trillion over the decade

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-reach-debt-deal-003853348.html

either way it sounds like bad news for anyone who cares.

[Downwinder]

22. So lets put the tax rates back to 1950 levels.

[No Elephants]

47. We can;t even get them to Reagan levels, let alone Eisenhower levels.

[Evergreen Emerald]

25. The republicans dictated the narrative. The dems moved the bar

Originally, the dems were concerned about social programs while the republicans were protecting the rich. Now the dems are concerned about the debt ceiling while the republicans protect the wealthy--and further erode the chance of recovery before the next election.

The dems caved again.

[Downwinder]

27. Grasping defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Hissyspit]

26. Kick nt

[indurancevile]

28. "the lowest level of domestic spending since Dwight Eisenhower was president" = deflation & unem-

ployment.

i guess his education didn't do him much good if he announces that like it's some kind of victory for "the people".

truly disgusted.

[XemaSab]

30. I'm disturbed by the qualifier "domestic"

:o

[Muskypundit]

31. It just means they didnt touch the department of war

[XemaSab]

38. Exactly

:(

[Igel]

36. Certainly not in $.

We're at what, $3.6 trillion or so?

Probably in terms of GDP, but that presupposes some clear idea about what GDP growth is like.

Or maybe by "domestic spending" he meant "discretionary non-military spending"? In constant dollars?

Hard to know what he meant. Presumably there's some interpretation of his words that is consistent with reality. I suspect most people will have some sort of naive interpretation like, "We'll be spending the fewest dollars in the US on federal spending since Eisenhower." In other words, they'll pick the most obviously incorrect reading, but the one most politically useful to Obama.

[indurancevile]

37. whether in real dollars, inflation-adjusted dollars, or as a percent of gdp, setting spending

at the levels of the 1950s = deflationary.

deflation = business failures & unemployment.

deflation is what happened in the great depression. and they've been barely holding it off as it is.

[LarryNM]

48. Are the tax rates on the Wealthiest and Corporations to be Returned to Eisenhower Levels.

No Need To Ask.

[BlueIdaho]

29. Color me underwhelmed. nt.

[Downwinder]

32. This changes the political field. Do you contribute to your local

Congress critter or do you support a super critter?

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[Playinghardball]

49. Obama announces debt agreement

Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama announced on Sunday that Democrats and Republicans leaders have reached an agreement to reduce the U.S. deficit and avoid default.

Obama said the agreement will cut about $1 trillion over 10 years.

The bipartisan plan will be presented to Congress on Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.

"Leaders from both parties and in both chambers will present this agreement to our caucuses tomorrow," Reid said on the Senate floor.

A GOP source close to the negotiations tells NBC News that both sides are "very close" to agreement on a two-step debt-ceiling deal that's essentially the Boehner plan without the balanced-budget amendment and modified triggers.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43949638/ns/politics-capitol_hill/?gt1=43001

[ClarkUSA]

50. But will the Teabagger House approve it? Therein lies the rub.

[Tx4obama]

52. I think that the majority of the teabaggers in the House said that ...

they would NOT vote for a bill that did not have the Balanced Budget Amendment stipulation in it.

So, is this going to die in the House?

[DFW]

54. Probably not

If it does, Boehner doesn't last the year as Speaker.

[rosesaylavee]

76. I am betting he doesn't last the summer.

But if its Cantor who replaces him, this will only get worse.

[TrollBuster9090]

81. On the other hand, that would be like firing the Captain of the Titanic AFTER it hit the iceberg.

This little adventure only proves that Boehner's job is IMPOSSIBLE, and that anybody who gets the job is headed for the same thing. My guess is that Boehner stays until 2012, so that "removing 'rinos' like John Boehner" can become part of the rallying cry for the Republicans in 2012. "Yeah, nothing got done in the 112th Congress, but it's all because of the Democrats AND the establishment rinos! Down with the RINOS! AYN RAND O AKBAR!"

[ClarkUSA]

55. That's what they said alright. Boehner had to put that in his plan to get them to vote for it.

My theory: "If President Obama praises it, the Teabagger House won't vote for it."

[coalition_unwilling]

77. LOL - Your wry observations do make me laugh, a fact for which I

am grateful :) Almost makes one think to test your hypothesis that Obama should propose doing away with Social Security as some weird sort of political Pavlovian experiment to see whether Teabaggers will come out against it. I would pay good money to see that :)

[Rozlee]

58. Damn near a half of them have said they won't vote for ANY raise in the debt ceiling limit

Under any circumstances, no way, no how, period. This news conference might all be posture, since the Asian markets are already surging at the news and they all want the financials to keep from freaking out even more. Or Obama might finally be getting cagey (fat chance) and getting the people to see that if the deal's broken, the teabaggers were the ones that brought it all crashing down.

[TrollBuster9090]

62. The "look what the stock market obviously wants" appproach would only work if the deal broke down

later tonight and the Asian markets immediately crashed again. Then they could point to a causal effect.

In any case, if a deal is struck, as you pointed out, it would only pass both chambers as a "Coalition of the Sane." ie-Most of the Democrats and all of the moderate Republicans. (I'd be fine with a hand full of progressive Democrats voting against it, with the long term goal of moving the Overton Window leftward.)

[Rozlee]

74. I concede your points.

Only problem is "all the moderate Republicans." They've been scared moderate by the teabaggers, if that's the case. It must be hard for them to see their extreme views twisted to an even more grotesque vision than even they could imagine. It's almost like they were joyriders in a stolen car, who picked up some serial killers and are now wondering who'll save them.

[coalition_unwilling]

78. Hah! Brilliant imagery ('joyriders in a stolen car who picked up

some serial killers . . .") - made my evening. Thanks :)

[left on green only]

82. I Like Your Analogy, LOL

Thank you for the humor.

[Trajan]

60. I am not sure how my fellow DUers are performing the calculus ...

Seems that the current crop of idiotic, small minded Teahadist buffoons number approx. 85 members .... Given that; we can calculate a range of approx. 350 semi-reasonable congress members who might be available to vote for a consensus ....

Boehner is going to horsewhip the GOP members who are NOT Teahadists to vote with the Democrats ....

Thine will be done ...

[TrollBuster9090]

68. It would be fairly easy to form a 'Coalition of the "Centrists"' that would look like this:

(I put "centrists" in quotes, obviously, because what we are now calling centrists are what we WOULD have been calling "moderate conservatives" just 15 years ago.)

Here's my math, such that it is:

Allowing 140 of the 240 House Republicans to act like children and not vote for it, you get 100 Republicans.

Allowing 75 Democrats to vote against it because a) it's a suicidal idea to make CUTS during a recession, b) it asks nothing of the plutocrats in terms of sacrifice, and c) why the hell did we fight for nearly a century to GET Medicare and Social Security just to end up giving them away to blackmailers and terrorists...that leaves 118 Democratic Representatives, to get you to the magic 218.

Either way, this won't work without Boehner calling on Democrats for help, meaning that he's out as House Speaker (which was probably part of the idea to begin with), and that about 100 moderate Republicans from moderate districts will be primaried and possibly replaced by un-electable tea party lunatics in 2012.

[Chan790]

75. No and for Boehner that's the point.

I suspect that an unspoken agenda of his in the last few days was to marginalize the Tea Party to make it clear that he doesn't need them to pass legislation and that they will not dictate policy to him.

He can pass this even if they all vote no (and the Progressive Caucus votes no) by taking the 50%+1 he needs to pass it out of the non-crazy wing of his own party and Dems in the middle.

(I still don't like the deal but I do see the roadmap on how they intend to pass it over the objections of both the left and the far-right.)

[Kablooie]

53. If some Democrats vote for it the teapugs lose their influence.

[ClarkUSA]

56. My theory: "If President Obama praises it, the Teabagger House won't vote for it."

[Lasher]

51. I have served notice to all my Democratic Congressional reps.

They'd better not vote for anything that includes any form of cuts to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid. And they'd better not vote for any measure that fast tracks cuts in the Senate.

[ejbr]

57. +1 n/t

[MissDeeds]

59. +1

[Hoyt]

64. I read/hear you. But, I've told mine that we need to take a broader look.

Don't want anyone on lower end of Medicare scale to take any kind of cut. Even the catfood commission draft recommended increased benefits for lower end. But, I don't mind what I consider minor adjustments to SS for the next decade; and no benefits cuts to Medicare, etc. I don't have any problem with savings from negotiating pharmaceuticals, and changes like that. I think that is what the proposal is. Not for giving them a blank check to make the changes, but minor changes that makes the system better -- including making young folks feel the system will be here in future -- are in my best interest.

I think Obama and Congress has done a fair job with this. Now, if they'll get on a jobs program with the elections coming up, maybe something will get done there too.

[swilton]

65. +1/nfi

[cstanleytech]

70. I read they are doing some reforms though which I assume are

largely changes like setting it up so hospitals followup on patients on medicare that they discharge but as for cuts the only ones that will happen is if when they go to trim some more if congress doesnt pass it then automatically there are across the board cuts to medicare and defense.
Though the article on cnn said the medicare cuts would be aimed at providers and insurance companies and not beneficiaries like my mother, we shall see though.

[wisteria]

61. If Pelosi goes along and gets Dems to do so, Boehner might not need the Tea baggers to go along. n/

[blackspade]

63. This says it all for me:

"debt-ceiling deal that's essentially the Boehner plan without the balanced-budget amendment and modified triggers"

This should be a non-starter for Democrats.

[TrollBuster9090]

72. Actually, the balanced budget amendment is meaningless.

If they're talking about a bill that legislates a SEPARATE vote on a balanced budget amendment, who cares? It won't pass. And even if it does, it has to be sent to the States for ratification, where it again wouldn't pass. And even that process would take several years.

The whole balanced budget amendment is just Kabuki theater for both Democrats and Republicans.


However, having said that, I don't think a balanced budget amendment is a bad idea, provided it contained an exemption where you could borrow money to stimulate the economy during a recession (recession being defined in terms of both GDP AND unemployment). In other words, a high unemployment rate could be a TRIGGER to suspend the balanced budget law. That would have to be part of the subtext of the amendment.

One thing nobody ever mentions when they mention a balanced budget amendment is that IT WOULD ALSO STOP ALL OF THESE PANDERING TAX CUTS.

A balanced budget amendment would certainly make social programs vulnerable..BUT it would also make TAX CUTS seem less easy. My feeling is that a balanced budget amendment would put both social programs AND tax cuts on the table, and since the social programs are very popular, it would be the TAX CUTS that get thrown out, not the social programs. This would be a good thing. It would provide incentive to FINALLY re-write the tax code, do some REAL research into which tax cuts and which loopholes are actually good for the economy (since tax cuts are no longer "free" so to speak) rather than just padding the pockets of the economic royalists, and bring in a taxing and spending policy that actually made sense.

[DFW]

83. You're assuming a best case scenario

It only makes tax cuts etc. seem less easy with a Democratic administration in power.

With a Republican administration in power, they'd just cut taxes and balance the budget
by cutting all non-military programs in place to help the citizenry until we were like
a 3rd world country with too many guns and not enough doctors, teachers or engineers.

Assuming an administration has only our best interests at heart is a dangerous game
at best. Remember Dick Cheney?

[TrollBuster9090]

85. I think we've already had proof that that wouldn't happen.

The Republicans literally controlled all three branches of government from 2001-2007 and they didn't cut social security or Medicare. All they did was cut taxes. In fact, they ADDED to Medicare (Medicare part D), although, granted it was really meant as a gift to the pharmaceutical industry.

Nope, when the chips are down, Republicans will not cut programs that are popular enough to get them booted out if they try to cut them.

However, I'd take your point that they'd gladly cut programs that are needed for humanitarian purposes, but which only help a minority of people, or which only benefit people that don't normally vote Republican anyway. They'd be more tempted to cut those if there was a balanced budget amendment.

[blackspade]

86. I'll try again.

"debt-ceiling deal that's essentially the Boehner plan "

Any plan that Boehner comes up with should be a non-starter for Democrats.

[Firebrand Gary]

66. I am reserving judgement until I hear what is in the legislation.

[CarrieLynne]

67. does that mean we have to go thru this again in 6 months? ugh!

[cstanleytech]

71. Not exactly.

Check out the cnn article they said and I quote

"According to sources, cuts in the trigger mechanism would be across-the-board, including Medicare and defense spending, to present an unpalatable alternative for both parties in the event Congress fails to pass the special committee's proposal.

"You want to make it hard for them just to walk away and wash their hands," Gene Sperling, the director of Obama's National Economic Council, told CNN. "You want them to say, if nothing happens, there will be a very tough degree of pain that will take place."

Preliminary reaction showed sensitivity to that pain. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, said the automatic spending cuts under a trigger mechanism should not affect Medicare benefits for senior citizens.

"The way we understand it's going to be worded is it does not affect beneficiaries. It would affect providers and insurance companies," Levin said. "That should be the case, because if it hits beneficiaries, you're going to lose lots of Democratic votes.""

[DeSwiss]

69. ....

"It is useless for sheep to pass a resolution in favor of vegetarianism while wolves remain of a different opinion." ~William Inge

[russspeakeasy]

73. "Announcing " seems to be his strongest attribute.

Salesmanship? Nope, not a clue....just announcements: "Well, we just got the shit beat out of us again." "Well, we've got a lot of work to do." "Well, I wish the "other side" would have been more cooperative." "Well, we'll try really hard in my next term." Next time you want a donation call a fucking bank.

[Turborama]

79. Sean Hannity is seriously pissed off, which makes me very happy. n/t

[brentspeak]

80. "I believe it is peace for our time."

[BNJMN]

84. Will Bush's Tax Cuts expire or what? When? [nt]

[Vinca]

88. During this horrific recession, is it wise to have "the lowest level of domestic spending?"

Out in the real world people are suffering.

[Doctor_J]

89. No, it is a disaster

But this is as far from FDR as any Dem president in history.

[rhett o rick]

90. Do you agree with Sen Bernie Sanders that this is a huge win for the Right Wing? nm