Why Democrats Lose: The Super Committee Appointees

[jtown1123]

Robert Borosage from Campaign for America's Future writes a pretty good piece about how GOP plans to appoint strict "no new taxes" representatives to the Super Committee yet Harry Reid wants appointees "open" to new ideas...we're screwed. Do we really want blue dog Democrats like Mark Warner and Kent Conrad making "tough decisions" on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? I sure as hell don't.

From the article:

Since the Commission’s mandate is to target Social Security, Medicare and other entitlements as well as tax revenues, who gets appointed to the gang of 12 will be critical. The president says he will push for a “balanced plan,” but he gets no appointments....

If you care about Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, be very worried. Consider the stated positions of the Senate leaders on appointees:

Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell says that the super committee will “certainly deal with major entitlement reforms,” even as he reassured conservatives that they should not worry about tax hikes, telling a Fox News reporter that the likelihood of tax hikes coming out of the committee is “pretty low.”

“What I can pretty certainly say to the American people, the chances of any kind of tax increase passing with this, with the appointees of John Boehner and I, are going to put in there are pretty low,” said McConnell. He added: “I’m comfortable we aren’t going to raise taxes coming out of this joint committee.”He contrasts wth negotiating with the president, because the president insisted that entitlement reform be accompanied by “big taxes. That was a price we were not willing to pay.”

Meanwhile the Democratic Senate Majority leader Harry Reid wants representatives who are open to all ideas. Reid told reporters Monday that he would select people who are willing to make hard choices but aren’t locked in. “One of my friends asked me, he said, Harry, I'd like to be on that committee,” Reid said. ”But I think it doesn't bode well for me to choose someone who the world knows how they feel about it before they go in there. I think we better look at other avenues.”

LINK: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011083102/why-democrats-lose-super-commitee-appointees

[xchrom]

1. 'new ideas' = 'shared sacrifice' . Nt

[jtown1123]

2. Pretty much. Hopefully this is just pandering to the media to look "serious"

but I'm not convinced...

[fasttense]

3. Yeah, just look at the idiot Simpson who was appointed by Obama

to the cat food commission. Social Security is going to be gutted.

We need to fight back.

Join the Egyptian style protest in October.

http://october2011.org/welcome

[swilton]

15. ++++++++++

[tularetom]

4. Exactly what I was afraid of

McConell and Boner appoint people with an agenda. Reid and Pelosi appoint people with spines like Slinkys.

Guess which way this committee votes.

[jtown1123]

5. Pelosi had good appointees to the CatfoodCommission (Becerra & Schakowsky) but 2 token liberals

won't be able to stop anything in this super committee. We need all Dems on board.

[OHdem10]

6. Borosage is correct. Look at the Plan Reid developed in Debt

Ceiling Debate. Reids plan was almost identical to
Boehner's--No Revenues and all cuts.

Look at Reid's prior appointments. HCR, Gang of Six.
Conservative Democrats Baucus, Conrad . It is if
Durbin is thrown in for appearances.

On a Commission---You know Republicans will put
most ardent Conservatives. Reid will put
Conservative Democrats. If any Liberal Leaners
are there, they are outnumbered from the get go.

[jtown1123]

7. You know what's disturbing is that Durbin no longer votes to protect SS, Medicare

etc. I've been following his statements the last two years and he is no longer a liberal in my book. He talks like a Blue dog.

[FLAprogressive]

9. Durbin is no different than Baucus and Conrad.

[Armstead]

8. That's a good microcosm of the whole damn problem

The GOP has a clear conservative position they will push for.

Us? We'll appoint people who have a muddy conservative DLC position, with maybe a muddy sorta liberal as window dressing.

Maybe that won't happen, but I doubt it.

[Pholus]

10. So for all you people who think it's capitulate or "burn it down" here's the chance.

Stack this committee with fighters. Go in strong and try to kill conservative priorities. Be prepared to take a little heat for it but take them hostage for once.

The ONLY way you can get out of being taken hostage every single time is to go after them. Make them understand that two can play this game. They haven't been in danger of losing their priorities since 1999 because we think we need to be the adults. They think they have our number about that and that hostage taking is a winning tactic. If you do it right this is the best chance you get, the odds are 50:50 on this panel. Shake them a bit and maybe would have two sets of adults instead of one.

Just sayin'

[jtown1123]

11. I'm all for stacking it with fighters. What are the chances of that happening though?

[Pholus]

14. Delta where Delta = limit as x goes to 0 of x squared.

in other words, zero.

[Bandit]

12. A short paragraph from Boston Globe that causes me some concern

Boston Globe

That would be followed by creation of the super committee to recommend an additional $1.8 trillion or more in deficit cuts, targeting benefit programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security or overhauling the tax code. http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-01/news/29839317_1_c...

Notice it has an or instead of an and

[jtown1123]

13. Yeah...That concerns me too.

[spanone]

16. why don't we announce that ss medicare and other entitlements are off the table? why the fuck not?

[Betty88]

17. So it has come to this?

Our democracy is now represented by six people?

On edit: Damn, I did it again, this is Jumptheshadow. I've taken Betty's laptop to Vegas and forgot that it was logged into her account.