'Super committee' fails to reach agreement

[OhioChick]

Source: CNN

4:49 PM EST, Mon November 21, 2011

Washington (CNN) -- Facing harsh reaction from financial markets and a frustrated public, the congressional "super committee" negotiating a possible deficit reduction agreement announced Monday it has failed to reach a deal.

A statement from the panel's co-chairs said that "after months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline."

It came after last-minute talks Monday on what one participant billed as a "new idea" in an effort to salvage agreement on a deficit reduction deal.

Markets dropped as news spread of the panel's expected failure. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 248 points Monday, with a minor recovery after being down more than 300 points earlier in the afternoon.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/21/politics/super-committee/index.html

[Stuart G]

1. Kick and Rec nt

[dtexdem]

2. Set up to fail: established to kick the issue down the road.

And now we're that far down the road. And this is just the latest pothole -- and far from the worst.

[sendero]

25. And the "sequester" falls into the same category..

... it will NEVER HAPPEN, i.e. the Pentagon will never take steep cuts. Not with this crew of clowns in DC.

[KamaAina]

3. EPIC FAIL.

:eyes:

[pinto]

4. Kick

:kick:

[russspeakeasy]

5. This was professional wrestling.

The Blue Cyclone vs The Red Devil.
Watch the weak ass dems vote for the pentagon budget. Once that is off the table, they can go after the social programs.
We are so screwed.

[politicasista]

6. If it failed, they why are

Dems being smeared as sellouts here? :shrug:

[rhett o rick]

9. I agree. The Dem's are finally showing some backbone.

I guess we can view it as not caving is a victory.

[sendero]

26. I think..

.. that is a fair assessment. Dems could have easily given away the store but they didn't.

IMHO, their demands were quite reasonable and I think the average American will agree.

[savalez]

10. Good question.

[politicasista]

11. Guess no answers (so far)

Interesting.

[Pab Sungenis]

12. The Dems sold out what was valuable to us early on.

We were informed that Medicaid was getting slashed, Medicare eligibility age was being raised, and Social Security was on the block too.

The Republicans didn't take the bait, refusing to give up anything, which finally gave the Democrats some spine.

Now let's see them stand by it and let the automatic cuts go through.

[savalez]

13. Oh so that's it. lol.

[Pab Sungenis]

17. Precisely.

If there really is no deal then this was rather ingenious. The Democrats frontloaded a willingness to cave, which made the GOP look like the bad guys.

"Look, we were willing to sell future generations into slavery, but you won't raise Donald Trump's taxes by a nickel? You jerks."

I wonder what would have happened if the GOP had called our bluff.

[savalez]

19. Bingo.

Dems knew that the Pubs are not for cuts at all and they ain't fiscally responsible either. That's just a tired old bullshit smokescreen. Pubs are beholden to a no tax pledge and a willingness to hold the economy hostage in order to make the President look bad. So Dems had to point out, in bold fashion, that the GOP is unreasonable and inline with only the wealthiest of Americans. Done. I won't be surprised if Cry Baby Boehner's congress approval rating keeps sliding below 9%. This is the only way to get the House back.

[politicasista]

14. Sounds like that is what the media said n/t

[savalez]

15. Yup.

Don't,

don't believe tha,

don't believe the hype.

~Public Enemy


http://youtu.be/LK8sxngSWaU



(edited to add link)

[politicasista]

21. co-sign n/t

[Frustratedlady]

7. I thought they were to be closed to any influence from outside?

This doesn't surprise me. I heard a comment that Grover Norquist had so much power over the Pugs on taxes, that they were following his lead because they didn't want him to put someone up to run against them.

Right on. Worry about your job and to hell with the country.

As far as I'm concerned, Norquist is a traitor.

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. There were two good results for Dems

The debt panel committee fails, or the GOP agrees to some large tax increase.

The debt panel committee failed. That's fine.

There was only one good result for GOPers: the debt panel committee comes back with no tax increases and massive cuts to SS and Medicare. That didn't happen, so they lost.

The trigger cuts are well structured and perfectly acceptable. The Dems have also clearly signaled their total unwillingness to budge on Bush tax cuts, which also bodes well for revenue down the line.

[Lost-in-FL]

16. Imagine that.

:eyes:

[sofa king]

18. Heh. Imagine THIS:

As you can see, the “do nothing” approach practically eliminates the deficit by mid-decade.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/chart-the-more-congress-fails-the-more-deficits-go-down.php?ref=fpblg

Someone hedged his bet. And there's our rope-a-dope.

[yurbud]

20. Supercommittee is Exhibit A of how corrupt DC is: in midst of worst economic crisis since Great....

Depression, Washington drops everything to CUT spending, especially on programs that help the poor and middle class, and that after Congress gave $700 billion to Wall Street and the Fed gave another $16 TRILLION to them.

The elected officials are either tone deaf or so corrupt that they simply don't care about how their actions effect or are perceived by the rest of us.

[sofa king]

22. Nope.

You can see a very brief description of the cuts here:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2011/11/21/glance-automatic-spending-cuts-from/YxTFlSNTpmy6dOA04GgFKI/story.html

—Mandatory programs that are exempt from sequestration, or cuts, include Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps, the CHIP children’s’ health program, child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income, the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans’ benefits and federal retirement.

The President covered that base, too.

Of course, Congressional Republicans could have easily avoided this by dealing honestly or coming up with a comprehensive plan of their own, with actual numbers in it, but they couldn't be bothered to do that. Also as expected by the President.

That is why the automatic cuts focus sharply on Defense spending. Now, the Republicans have to deal, or they lose a huge chunk of their campaign funding and much of their support base. They've been politically de-fanged.

Which makes them even more dangerous.

[DCBob]

24. +1 .. most people complaining about the automatic cuts dont even know what they are.

thanks for posting this.

[deacon]

23. It was an idiotic idea and this idea should never be heard from again. n/t