Fiscal Cliff Discussion

[Jake]

I've never seen a VP have such an important role in a major policy discussion.

[Balta1701]

I've never seen a VP have such an important role in a major policy discussion.

Were you around during the Cheney administration?

[Jake]

Hate it. We're going to be in a worse boat in 2 months because this didn't cover the debt ceiling.

 

Jumping from one crisis to another because Congress votes for laws that create crises is literally insane.

 

The lack of entitlement cuts in this deal gives leverage to Ds if a budget fight arises. That said, the buzz late last night was that a contingent part of this agreement in the Senate was that there would be no debt ceiling fight. I've seen that McCain has already contradicted that, so we shall see.

[Jake]

Were you around during the Cheney administration?

 

Cheney (like KW ) was more of the VP behind the curtain

[Balta1701]

Cheney (like KW ) was more of the VP behind the curtain

He was explicitly leading the Bush Admin's energy policy formation and he was perhaps the most powerful driving force behind the worst idea ever invasion of Iraq. His staff literally created the public case for the war.

[Balta1701]

The lack of entitlement cuts in this deal gives leverage to Ds if a budget fight arises. That said, the buzz late last night was that a contingent part of this agreement in the Senate was that there would be no debt ceiling fight. I've seen that McCain has already contradicted that, so we shall see.

If there was an agreement on the debt ceiling...I doubt the House would pass it. They want to play this game again.

 

It's no coincidence at all that the Sequester was put off...until the exact time the debt ceiling gets hit, in February.

[Jake]

If there was an agreement on the debt ceiling...I doubt the House would pass it. They want to play this game again.

 

It's no coincidence at all that the Sequester was put off...until the exact time the debt ceiling gets hit, in February.

 

Are liberals really that attached to the sequestration cuts? I haven't nailed down what, in addition to defense, gets hammered.

 

I hope once Boehner gets his spot back, he backs off of these fights.

[Balta1701]

Are liberals really that attached to the sequestration cuts? I haven't nailed down what, in addition to defense, gets hammered.

 

I hope once Boehner gets his spot back, he backs off of these fights.

No. Everything other than Medicare gets cut. It's the foolish "Conservative wet dream" of a 10% across the board cut. It's terrible policy...and it's particularly frustrating since they'd come on top of what is now a 5 year salary freeze, a 5 year discretionary spending freeze, and very large cuts imposed as part of the budget agreement between the Congress and the President last year. (If there was any spending that could easily be cut, it was heavily gashed last spring in that mess).

 

Of course, if you pay attention to even earlier this thread, counting "Cuts from that baseline" is somehow incorrect, since those cuts didn't actually happen so you have to cut even farther.

 

Just letting the payroll tax expire is going to cut probably 0.5% of GDP growth this year compared to what it would have been if you extended that. The Sequester cuts this year would have been $100 billion, and with feedbacks, that probably would cut another 1% from GDP on the year.

[Jake]

No. Everything other than Medicare gets cut. It's the foolish "Conservative wet dream" of a 10% across the board cut. It's terrible policy...and it's particularly frustrating since they'd come on top of what is now a 5 year salary freeze, a 5 year discretionary spending freeze, and very large cuts imposed as part of the budget agreement between the Congress and the President last year. (If there was any spending that could easily be cut, it was heavily gashed last spring in that mess).

 

Of course, if you pay attention to even earlier this thread, counting "Cuts from that baseline" is somehow incorrect, since those cuts didn't actually happen so you have to cut even farther.

 

Just letting the payroll tax expire is going to cut probably 0.5% of GDP growth this year compared to what it would have been if you extended that. The Sequester cuts this year would have been $100 billion, and with feedbacks, that probably would cut another 1% from GDP on the year.

 

I have to think someone will try to cut the payroll tax in the next budget negotiation.

[Balta1701]

I have to think someone will try to cut the payroll tax in the next budget negotiation.

Nope. It's gone. We're lucky to get the unemployment benefits extension.

 

The people who have to be satisfied in order to vote to increase the debt ceiling want upper income tax cuts. They couldn't care less about taxes for the lower levels; they keep trying to raise them to fund the upper income tax cuts.

[Reddy]

Hate it. We're going to be in a worse boat in 2 months because this didn't cover the debt ceiling.

 

Jumping from one crisis to another because Congress votes for laws that create crises is literally insane.

agreed.

 

and Obama's a p****.

 

$450,000? Please.

[Balta1701]

agreed.

 

and Obama's a p****.

 

$450,000? Please.

I could have had no problem with coming up with a new tax bracket or changing the level of the tax bracket. That's fair game. I would have had no issue with that.

 

The fact that we're going to redo this in 2 months with the full faith and credit of the U.S. on the line at the time, that's what drives me nuts.

[Reddy]

I could have had no problem with coming up with a new tax bracket or changing the level of the tax bracket. That's fair game. I would have had no issue with that.

 

The fact that we're going to redo this in 2 months with the full faith and credit of the U.S. on the line at the time, that's what drives me nuts.

 

meh. agreed with the second point.

 

love that the "house" is debating right now.

 

all 10 of them.

 

seriously, like 10 representatives are in the hall. pathetic.

[StrangeSox]

Jumping from one crisis to another because Congress votes for laws that create crises is literally insane.

 

 

this can't be said enough. The original "debt ceiling" bulls***, the "fiscal cliff," the upcoming second round of debt ceiling bulls***--all of these are problems invented entirely by Congress. There is no reason for them to exist. At all.

[StrangeSox]

Stick the President (not his advisors), and a few leaders of each party from each chamber (not THEIR advisors), in a room, with food, water, computers, pens and papers (and maybe a port-a-potty), and don't let them the f*** out until they have come to a solution on ALL the things in the cliff list I mentioned above. And not something for a year - I mean non-time-limited changes for all of it. That's what I'd love to see. Yes, I know that won't happen. I'm just pissed. Meantime, Joe Biden can keep the ship running, which should be motivation enough for all involved to get it done as quickly as humanly possible.

why should the process of governing be less democratic and less represenative? Why shouldn't everyone's Senators and Representatives have input into the process instead of just a select handful?

[Balta1701]

this can't be said enough. The original "debt ceiling" bulls***, the "fiscal cliff," the upcoming second round of debt ceiling bulls***--all of these are problems invented entirely by Congress. There is no reason for them to exist. At all.

Remember the good old fun days when people got to pretend that "We don't know what tax rates will be 5 years from now" was a significant source of uncertainty for business?

 

Now we're at "the Congress might decide too destroy the world economic system for no reason" every 3 months or so. After all, 2008 was...fun.

[ptatc]

why should the process of governing be less democratic and less represenative? Why shouldn't everyone's Senators and Representatives have input into the process instead of just a select handful?

I understand the sentiment that everyone should be represented however, nothing would ever get done. It's hard to get anything done with 10 people in one meeting let alone 100.

[cabiness42]

[Jake]

'Biden should have run the show for the past month'

[Balta1701]

The House Republicans were supposed to meet at 1:00 p.m. today, there hasn't been any obvious comment on the results of that meeting yet, but a couple of the far right Republicans came out in opposition to the deal before the meeting. CNN did report that Boehner did not take a position on the bill or on whipping in favor of it. Sounds like most of the House Democrats will support it, but they cannot bring the bill to the floor on their own. There is no vote scheduled in the House for today, and some of the Republicans are doubting whether the bill will come forwards today.

[Jake]

The House Republicans were supposed to meet at 1:00 p.m. today, there hasn't been any obvious comment on the results of that meeting yet, but a couple of the far right Republicans came out in opposition to the deal before the meeting. CNN did report that Boehner did not take a position on the bill or on whipping in favor of it. Sounds like most of the House Democrats will support it, but they cannot bring the bill to the floor on their own. There is no vote scheduled in the House for today, and some of the Republicans are doubting whether the bill will come forwards today.

 

Read tweet that said Cantor opposed it while Boehner was laying out 'options'

[kapkomet]

Remember the good old fun days when people got to pretend that "We don't know what tax rates will be 5 years from now" was a significant source of uncertainty for business?

 

Now we're at "the Congress might decide too destroy the world economic system for no reason" every 3 months or so. After all, 2008 was...fun.

 

 

For once, I agree with you 100%.

[Balta1701]

Within the last hour, House Republicans are now saying they will offer up an amended bill and send it back to the Senate (assuming they could pass it in the first place, of course). Presumably containing more spending cuts and maybe more tax cuts.

 

That would effectively break whatever agreement the Senate had in place.

[kapkomet]

Within the last hour, House Republicans are now saying they will offer up an amended bill and send it back to the Senate (assuming they could pass it in the first place, of course). Presumably containing more spending cuts and maybe more tax cuts.

 

That would effectively break whatever agreement the Senate had in place.

 

 

In other words, they don't have the votes to pass ANY tax increase. It's pretty amazing that even the RINO's are holding out - Boner only needs 20 votes to cover his Nancy Pelosi stance, right?

[StrangeSox]

I understand the sentiment that everyone should be represented however, nothing would ever get done. It's hard to get anything done with 10 people in one meeting let alone 100.

But that is our form of representative government. I don't feel that i should lose my representation in Congress and be left only with someone to vote "yes/no" on major bills.