dagblog - Comments for "GOP Picks Wingnuts for Deficit Super Committee"

Pelosi picks Van Hollen,

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 18:53:36 +0000

In reply to GOP Picks Wingnuts for Deficit Super Committee

Pelosi picks Van Hollen, Clyburn and Bacera:

http://www.nationaljournal.com//congress/pelosi-announces-picks-for-super-committee-20110811

The Joint Committee can

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 16:00:48 +0000

In reply to So how much do you want to

The Joint Committee can recommend any kind of deficit-reduction measures it wants: further cuts in the new discretionary caps, cuts in any entitlement program, and tax increases of any kind. There may be severe political constraints, but there are no legal constraints, contrary to what some congressional leaders are claiming.

source: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "How the Potential Across-the Board-Cuts in the Debt Limit Deal Would Occur", Richard Kogan, August 8, at: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

It's entirely possible entitlement cuts (including, but not limited to, SS/Medicare--sorry, stilli, trying to stick to the language the technical experts are using on this) will be discussed by members of the committee.

If the supercommittee does not get a majority of 7 or more votes in favor of any specific proposal, the automatic cuts will kick in. In which case:

The $55 billion in annual non-defense cuts would come from both mandatory (entitlement) and discretionary programs. The mandatory cuts would include:
Cuts in Medicare payments to providers and insurance plans (those cuts are limited to 2 percent of such payments in any year, or about $10 billion in 2013).

About $7 billion in cuts in the other mandatory programs that are subject to sequestration, the biggest of which is farm price supports. A number of key mandatory programs are exempt from sequestration, including Social Security, Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement.

source: same as above

So, the only way there are literally no cuts to entitlement programs (not synonymous with cuts to the end beneficiaries of those programs, as noted above) is if the supercommittee gets 7 or more members to agree to proposed cuts that don't include any, and which end up getting enacted into law.

So, no bet.

So how much do you want to

Beetlejuice — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 15:26:43 +0000

In reply to Actually, the Republicans

So how much do you want to wager?

Is there reason based on what

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:34:41 +0000

In reply to Tax the rich (through tax

Is there reason based on what he's said and done to think Portman might be a GOP heretic on revenues? Knowing his history, why, then, would they have appointed him? Won't Boehner have brought the curtain down on his Speakership if Portman actually does go over to the dark side on revenues?

Tax the rich (through tax

Elusive Trope — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 14:21:05 +0000

In reply to And within the terms of the

Tax the rich (through tax reform) to generate more revenue and to avoid more extensive cuts to government spending in order help stimulate not only our economy but those overseas.

And within the terms of the

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:54:59 +0000

In reply to The pundits on Lawrence

And within the terms of the debt agreement, if Portman and Kerry were to "rise above the partisanship", that would mean they would do what, exactly?

Actually, the Republicans

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:52:53 +0000

In reply to I'll place a bet with you

Actually, the Republicans hoped the White House would put SS and Medicare cuts on the table this time, instead of them.

Which is what happened.

Rove wrote a piece in the WSJ online where, after having in an earlier piece--all in Obama's and the Democrats' very best electoral interests, of course--suggested to Obama proposing a grand bargain on debt reduction, he proceeded to note that it was the Democrats who had proposed cuts to SS and Medicare.

The pundits on Lawrence

Elusive Trope — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:26:55 +0000

In reply to GOP Picks Wingnuts for Deficit Super Committee

The pundits on Lawrence McDonnell's show both saw Portman as the possible wild card in the mix. The question was whether he would embrace party loyalty or saving the global economy which he knows is on the brink of going over the edge in part because of the stagnant economy of the US. The key was some kind of pairing of Portman and Kerry attempting to rise above the partisanship.

I agree it's people who

Beetlejuice — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:03:35 +0000

In reply to People, people! They are not

I agree it's people who create the wealth. Problem is, the GOPer's have no clue there are some American's ... mostly not part of their base ... who work for a living that create the wealth the rich enjoy. In fact, I'm of the opinion they firmly believe any salary above minimum wage is employee wage theft. And benefits are evil because they steadily suck from the wealth teats.

The GOPer's have found a goldmine of campaign contributions with catering to the whims and needs of the wealthy above servicing the wants, needs and desires of the public who puts them in office. As long as there are people willing to keep them in office ... see the results of Wisconsin recall election ... it's an evil we all have to live and deal with.

I didn't see any comments on

Beetlejuice — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 11:02:40 +0000

In reply to Baucus is a long way from my

I didn't see any comments on his position with HC at the beginning of the debate, however towards the end I had no doubts where it was going, to my dissatisfaction.