All Signs Are That Deficit Reduction Committee Will Accomplish Nothing

[Emit]

~snip~

All of those selected to serve on the committee are coming to the deliberations with uncompromisable positions on the issues that need to be compromised if the deliberations are to be successful. Three of the appointees -- Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) and Reps. Dave Camp (R-MI) and Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) ) were members of the Bowles-Simpson commission and indicated that there were against the comprehensive plan the two co-chairmen recommended (there was no formal vote). All six of the GOP appointees have taken the no-tax increase pledge. Although they haven't signed a piece of paper pledging not to cut Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security, none of the Democratic appointees have shown any willingness to do compromise unilaterally on that...that is, they have only been willing to consider those changes if...and only if...Republicans agree to increase taxes.

None of this is the stuff that budget compromises are made of.

The important moment in last night's GOP debate in Iowa came when every candidate on the stage raised her or his hand to say they'd reject a 10-1 spending-cuts-to-tax-increase deficit reduction deal. In other words, even the most extreme tax increase to spending cut formula that has been mentioned in recent times -- or maybe ever -- was dismissed out of hand.

~snip~

How polarized are the Joint Select Committee's members as the debate begins? This graph from Enik Rising gives you one indication.

~snip~

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/stan-collender/2342/all-signs-are-deficit-reduction-committee-will-accomplish-nothing

[msongs]

1. it will keep the republican agenda alive and well and prominently in the news nt

[NYC_SKP]

2. I think the committee was formed as a mere STFU so we could get the debt ceiling raised.

...and get one with things.

I think they'll end up being largely powerless and in a constant state of stalemate.

Congress and government will be able to conduct business as usual after their little vacation.

[Ruby the Liberal]

4. And Toomey voted against it for not going far enough.

Yeah, I expect *big* things from this group.

Yawn.

[Marie Marie]

7. Toomey makes Michelle Bachmann look like a liberal.

He is so far to the right he no longer even registers on the chart. This wil be a total FAIL and the little people better be prepared to bend over yet again.

[bluestateguy]

3. It's all just going through the motions

The committee is either going to deadlock 6-6, or due to Max Baucus pass a plan down to Congress on a 7-5 vote which will then make it no farther than a Senate filibuster.

The real question is whether or not these supposed automatic cuts will ever materialize, or if Congress will find a way to put the kibosh on that too.

[Ruby the Liberal]

5. Straight majority up or down vote in both Chambers

No debate, no amendments, no filibuster. Thats how the 'compromise' was written.

[madfloridian]

6. I think Baucus will side with GOP

[starroute]

8. Whatever Baucus does, it's hard to imagine anything that can pass

Anything approved by a vote of all six Republicans plus Baucus would have zero tax increases. It would probably have no significant cuts in military spending -- and not a lot coming out of Homeland Security or the State Department either.

That suggests it would have to consist of massive slashings of domestic programs -- not just fat but muscle and maybe even some bone. Entire agencies, large chunks of certain departments, money that the states are dependent on. Funding for clean air and water, for food safety and disease control, for disaster relief. Plus, of course, an evisceration of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

And meanwhile you're going to have every member of the House of Representatives -- plus a third of the Senate -- up for reelection in less than a year from when the package of cuts is released and knowing with near-total certainty that they will be primaried if they vote for it and very likely defeated in the general election if they survive a primary.

That is just how bad it will be.

Our job, of course, it to make this crystal clear to our elected representatives -- to make sure that every one of them knows they will be held individually responsible if this abomination goes through and punished for their support of it. And we have to do it starting right now, because the thing is going to be negotiated in secret and there won't be any time to mount a campaign after it is released.

[Jim Lane]

11. I disagree, because of the trigger

The Republicans-plus-Baucus plan will have unanimous (or virtually unanimous) support from the Republicans in both houses, plus a few Democratic Senators. All these people will defend their vote by talking about the manufactured "debt crisis" and by saying that the alternative to approving the supercommittee's plan would have been the automatic trigger, which would be horrible.

In the 2012 election, the economy will still be bad, partly because of this terrible deal (i.e., it will be bad whether the outcome is the supercommittee's plan or the automatic trigger). Many voters will blame Obama because he's nominally in charge. The worst thing is that people aren't seeing the connection between economic contraction and fiscal policies that cause contraction.

[ixion]

9. it's a prototype. and if it manages to run it's full lifecycle

look for more 'super' congress' and much, much less democracy.

[ladjf]

10. It would be fortunate if the super congress accomplished nothing

rather than passing laws that further damage our economy. nt

[hfojvt]

12. it is my hope that it does accomplish nothing

the automatic cuts are bad, but probably not as bad as the piece of excrement that a bi-partisan committee will come up with (see, six, gang of). There are even people on the left who talk about tax "reform" of "closing loopholes" and "lowering all rates" (especially those at the top. If they do reach an agreement, I expect to be lobbying hard to kill it. (the trouble is a piece of crap can pass with 90% Republican support and 15% Democratic support, and then what, could Obama be counted on to veto it? My fear is that Obama cannot be counted on. Not to fight for the working class, only to betray us - again. So the best case scenario is for the whole committee to implode.)

Sorry, my idea of reform would be for higher rates at the top http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/129 . I am not against eliminating deductions (like all of Schedule A http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/151)

but as I note in that post, I would not then lower the top rate, instead I would compensate those in the middle class who would be losing their deductions. The gang of six just compensates those at the top, leaving the middle class and the upper middle class to pay more and making the tax code even less progressive.

So I hope they "fail" in that attempt.