MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
Debt ceiling negotiators think they've hit on a solution to address the debt ceiling impasse and the public's unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work: Create a new Congress.
This "Super Congress," composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn't mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers -- six from each chamber and six from each party.
Legislation approved by the Super Congress -- which some on Capitol Hill are calling the "super committee" -- would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn't be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who'd have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law. A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.
Comments
Well this would give us fewer targets to aim for when the revolution comes.
by cmaukonen on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 12:09am
No thank you. Some of the republicans have signed a pledge that they cling to in a way that has become a act of treason. They signed it to get support and money to help them get elected. Now they are all doing what Grover Norquist wants and not what is needed. Why should they get cover for that?
by trkingmomoe on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 12:34am
I am not finding this story any where but in the blogs. This could be a scam. It sure has the blogosphere in a snit.
by trkingmomoe on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 2:09am
Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism has a good take on it.
In other words it's an attempt to sidestep the tea party right and the progressive left. Both thorns in the side to the rank and file.
by cmaukonen on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 10:19am
If you google fascism, you will find as you read the description and definition, that indeed the far right is moving the country into fascism.
Because Hindenburg was having trouble forming a stable government in Germany during the early 1930's, he agreed to a committee of cabinet members to appoint a chancellor of the new coalition government. They appointed Hitler to be the chancellor, but only to be a figure head. The Nazis seized power after that.
Taking power from the congress to give to a committee when they won't do the job, that they are there to do, is dangerous. The president has the power when there is an emergency to act to protect the country.
by trkingmomoe on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 3:16pm
Quite likely it's my ignorance talking, but I like the idea of limiting the amendment process of bills. (I'm fairly certain that Articleman would disagree with me based on previous stuff he's written, and I'm also quite certain that he knows a lot more about the political process than I.) One thing that really bothers me is when bills get thrown together that contain dozens of unrelated pieces of legislation just to that legislator A can cover his/her tuchus by explaining why s/he couldn't/had to vote for a particular bill, only to have challenger B run attack ads lamenting for that other thing that was in the bill that legislator A did/did not vote for.
If a simple bill takes away important services, then it'll be clear exactly whose side these legislators are on. They won't have the usual cover.
As for the "mortgage deduction", I'd like to point out there's no such thing and there never has been. It's a mortgage interest deduction. Why on Earth would we want to encourage personal debt? (I say this as a hypocrite who just bought a new house and will be able to claim that deduction for the first time in his life.)
by Verified Atheist on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 7:41am
WaPo
Tweaking Mitch McConnell’s ‘escape hatch’
By Editorial, Published: July 19
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tweaking-mitch-mcconnells-escape-hatch/2011/07/18/gIQA9LOhMI_story.html
Since WaPo is off my radar map I missed this jewel. But it looks as if HuffPost maybe in the ballpark, just a week later.
by Beetlejuice on Sun, 07/24/2011 - 12:13pm