8
   

The Super Committee! 100 Days To Save The World From Armageddon.

 
 
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 01:33 pm
The Administrative and Legislative branches of our government can't agree on how to make a dent in our deficits. The solution? Go on vacation for a month and appoint a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives to try to work out some sort of plan.
Their mission is to reduce next year's deficit by $1.2Tn over the next 10 years. They must come up with a plan by Thanksgiving - roughly 100 days - that 7 of the 12 members can agree on. If they fail, there will be across the board cuts. If they succeed, their plan must pass the House and the Senate with no alterations. Tick, tick.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 8 • Views: 3,183 • Replies: 37
No top replies

 
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 04:14 pm
@realjohnboy,
The chances are slim and none that they will come to any agreement.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 04:22 pm
I don't see how they can agree on anything, but maybe they might fool me and come up with a decent plan.
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 05:02 pm
@edgarblythe,
I, too, am skeptical, edgar. The 3 Dems and 3 Repubs from the House seem to be intractably committed to their parties' more extreme wings. The Senators are being described as "dealmakers," willing to compromise at the end.
We will have to see.
In the meantime, if any of you find biographies of the 12 members of the super committee, please link or write your own profile of them.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 05:10 pm
@realjohnboy,
I don't like it. One constitutional challenge from a disgruntled third party and this whole exercise is gone kaput!
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Aug, 2011 07:06 pm
@tsarstepan,
WE could perhaps "incentivize" them. Whatd I do with my rope?
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 05:41 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

WE could perhaps "incentivize" them. Whatd I do with my rope?


Obama has it, but you haven't given him quite enough.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 06:20 am
I've said elsewhere that I don't think they're expected to accomplish anything. They may put out a proposal but it will probably fail in one chamber or the other. Neither chamber can come to consensus on substantive reforms, imo, and the triggers will be pulled. The triggers were specifically chosen because each one is desirable to one party and not anethema to the other.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 01:31 pm
@JPB,
At one point in the debate last night the moderator asked the candidates for a show of hands in response to this question:
"Would you reject a super committee plan that would increase taxes by $1 in exchange for $10 in spending cuts?"
All 8 hands shot up in unison. Perhaps, in front of a conservative Iowa audience, this might be expected. But if they are expressing their deeply held beliefs, the super committee might as well give up straight away.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 02:47 pm
@realjohnboy,
Right. Of course that's how they'd vote. Look at what the triggers accomplish. 1.2T in deficit cuts completely on the spending side. The entire thing is a Republican dream come true.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Aug, 2011 04:08 pm
I feel like the idea of a committee was for it to inevitably fail. I feel like we should look at that outcome more. It will probably better reflect what is to come.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2011 09:02 am
Cantor has supposedly attempted to put a leash on the mad dogs. Cantor? I'm surprised...

Quote:
Ethan Harris, co-head of global economics research at Bank of America, wrote this week that “Given the scale of the debt problem, a credible plan requires both revenue enhancement measures and entitlement reform. Washington’s recent debt deal did not include either.”

That is a common assessment, which may explain why Representative Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, was defensive about Republicans’ antitax absolutism in a memo to his colleagues on Monday.

”Over the next several months, there will be tremendous pressure on Congress to prove that S.& P.’s analysis of the inability of the political parties to bridge our differences is wrong. In short, there will be pressure to compromise on tax increases,” Mr. Cantor wrote.

But, he added, “We were not elected to raise taxes or take more money out of the pockets of hardworking families and business people.”

Republican presidential candidates share that fervor: in their Iowa debate Thursday night, all eight participants raised their hands when asked who would reject a long-term debt reduction package that had $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in revenue increases. More
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 09:57 am
@JPB,
Who on the other side is trying to restrain the mad-leeches?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2011 10:50 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Not the Senate Democratic members of the Supercommittee apparently:

Quote:
Senate Democrats on the supercommittee say the group needs to include stimulus for the economy in the deficit-reduction plan it has been tasked with producing by Thanksgiving.

The three Senate Democrats serving on the 12-member deficit supercommittee outlined their approach to the talks in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Wednesday.

Supercommittee Co-Chairwoman Patty Murray (Wash.) and Sens. Max Baucus (Mont.) and John Kerry (Mass.) said the supercommittee needs to make jobs a top priority.

“We know that our goal is to reduce spending. But we also know that America faces not just a budget deficit but also a jobs deficit. Nobody on this committee would be happy if we reduced the budget deficit but even more Americans end up losing their jobs,” Murray, Baucus and Kerry wrote in the op-ed. Source



Cantor on brinksmanship and the Supercommittee:

Quote:
To help reduce uncertainty, Cantor is moving to quell rank-and-file grumbling about 2012 spending and the supercommittee.

He said full-year 2012 spending bills should be enacted at the spending levels agreed to in the debt ceiling deal.

That deal set next year’s spending at $1.043 trillion but some more conservative members were still wishing for deeper cuts next year.

Agreeing to proceed with appropriations at the set level would help avoid a spending fight that could shut the government down after Sept. 30, cantor said. He is also making clear he wants full-year bills enacted, rather than an omnibus package or continuing resolution.

“While all of us would like to have seen a lower discretionary appropriations ceiling for the upcoming fiscal year, the debt limit agreement did set a level of spending that is a real cut from the current year level. I believe it is in our interest to enact into law full-year appropriations bills at this new lower level,” Cantor writes.

Cantor is also urging his members to support the deficit reduction supercommittee created by the debt deal, adding that the supercommittee must succeed in coming up with “at least” $1.5 trillion in deficit cuts, rather than allowing automatic cuts to be triggered.

“I have heard some assert that certain sectors would be better off under the sequester. I believe this is false and would unnecessarily induce more uncertainty and a worse policy outcome,” he said. Source


0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Oct, 2011 03:19 pm
DOWN TO 26 DAYS.
Are we having fun yet? The super committee came out of their hole this week to discuss how much progress they have made thus far. It appears there has been none. In fact, the 6 Dems and 6 Repubs can not agree with other on any mix of budget cuts and tax increases. They also are also alienating members of their own parties even though they are making little progress.
26 days? Not really. It will take the CBO a week or two to score whatever agreement if there is one and then Congress will have to find time to debate an up or down vote on it.
The deadline becomes more like November 11th, or perhaps the 4th.
Failure to come up with a plan that passes Congress will trigger across the board spending cuts.
I sense that members of Congress - from both parties - will figure out a way to step back from the deus ex machina super committee.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 04:56 pm
It Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time...
The super committee was assigned the task of cutting the deficit by $1.2T over 10 years. Piece of cake, said some members of Congress. Let's shoot for $2T. No, $3T or how about $4T.
The deadline is just a couple weeks away and there seems to be no progress. The cut spending for social programs group and the raise taxes on the rich faction are seemingly unable to compromise.
If there is no agreement by the due date, there will be across the board cuts in the federal budgets for the next few years to reach the $1.2T. Those cuts would involve $500B from the military, which is something like 5% of its budget.
There would also be a 10% cut in pay for members of Congress.
Now there is a frantic move going on to move the goalposts and change the rules.
The super committee might revise downward their $1.2T and any across the board cuts would not include the military.

I am a bit surprised this drama hasn't been covered more, particularly given that Congress already has an approval rating of around 10%.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 05:00 pm
@realjohnboy,
Those 10% must be illiterate and totally unaware of any current events other than who is winning "Dancing With Stars".
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Nov, 2011 06:37 pm
@realjohnboy,
I thought then and I think now this was a terrible idea. It will either automatically click in, or the Democrats give in. The Republicans do not seem to be willing to concede one speck.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Nov, 2011 12:00 am
@edgarblythe,
I hope they exempt the military and take all the cuts out of social spending. That might even wake up the brain dead voters of the U.S. although I doubt it will distract them from dancing with the stars or wether Kardashian will give her ring back.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Nov, 2011 12:08 am
@realjohnboy,
Quote:
It Seemed Like A Good Idea At The Time..
It never was a good idea and only seemed to be a good idea to the morons. There was never any reason to think that this was going to work, and now that it will not they are going to try to defuse the trigger...but THAT might not work either. I dont know what the Vegas odds of gutting the defense department is but I put it at around 30%. It was always going to happen at some point, but maybe 10-20 years down the line, not now.

If this happens it will be a major breaking of faith with the American people. Millions of Americans went to war for America, and came back broken or otherwise gave up a lot, and now we look to take a huge chunk of their hide because Washington no longer works.

This, folks, is going to be a problem.

EDIT: "delay and pray" has not worked in Europe, and it will not work in America. In both places we see from our so called leaders a massive refusal to step up to the plate.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Super Committee! 100 Days To Save The World From Armageddon.
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/17/2022 at 02:44:20