My previous post about the supercommittee covered how it was created and underlined the absurd, unprecedented powers the 12 members held in determining the future of U.S. spending.
Now that you know the foundation for the committee, it's time to meet each member. I planned on breaking every person down, but CNN already did that so I figure I will link to them as a kudos or a digital high-five.
Meet the committee! (CNN-style)
This website does a great job at breaking down some of the statements supercommittee members have said regarding revenue increases (higher taxes) and their stance on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. It's a bit skewed toward the Democrats because they have historically defended the big three of government programs.
The reason websites like strengthensocialsecurity.org have cropped up is because the supercommittee has to debate how they want to reform Social Security, military spending, Medicare, Medicaid and tax increases (I'm not going to call them increase revenues anymore. We are all adults here).
You, what's going to happen here, and why the voting records of each member is extremely important, is that the Democrats and Republicans of the committee are going to side with each other 6-6.
The Democrats (hopefully) will refuse to alter Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid either because the Republicans refuse to budge on something, or because the cuts are too strict. While this is the Democrats hard-line stance, they won't prove to be a resilient as the Republicans because the Democrats showed they don't have the courage to stand up to the Republicans during the debt ceiling debate. They caved under pressure. Maybe caved is too kind a word.
Let's go with collapsed. Yeah, collapsed. The debt ceiling plan didn't have any revenue increases and did not even complete the intended goal of extended the debt ceiling until 2013. It's the reason why we have the supercommittee now.
The Republicans will refuse to increase taxes on anyone, especially the "job creators", or the richest 2 percent of Americans. And by refuse, I mean Republicans have taken the same position a small child wants when you take them to the store. They are sitting on the floor with their feet and arms crossed while contorting their face into a combination of slimy satisfaction and uncompromising defiance. The only way to get them to do what you want is to drag them kicking and screaming to the compromise table.
SO...back to my point about voting 6-6. Once the Republicans and Democrats have decided they can't find a deal, and they will at some point even if they don't announce it, a political power play to get one person to change sides will occur.
This is a good sign if you are a Republican. In the last few political battles, Democrats have time and time and TIME again backed off amid Republican pressure. See the debt ceiling issue I mentioned above. See the battle over funding the Federal Aviation Administration, which ended ONLY after a two-week shutdown that could have been avoided in the first place. The FAA almost had ANOTHER shut down (which would put people out of work and cause the government to lose revenue) because of our own Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK!
The Senate, which favors a Majority of Democrats, had to appease Coburn by dropping a section of the FAA/Highway funding bill that would make states spend 10 percent on bike paths and pedestrian safety and landscaping.
Sure, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are a bit bigger and more popular than bike paths, but I haven't seen a Democrat stand up for his principles in the face of the non-compromising political evil that are corporate Republicans and corporate Democrats.
So, back to my original point regarding the supercommittee and the inevitable 6-6 stalemate. The Democrats have already proven that they will compromise on their big issues, such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And other things like infrastructure spending and employment benefits and poor and middle-class tax breaks.
All the Republicans have to do is get ONE Democrat to join their side, and they can exert their political will on the committee. This means large spending cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. This means more spending cuts on government programs that protect consumers, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, which protect citizens from pollution and unsafe factory workings by regulating what businesses can and can't do when it comes to pollution and waste.
Sure, Democrats could get one Republican to join their side, but they have shown a complete lack of spine to accomplish such a feat.
This also means very few, if any, tax increases. Sounds like a good thing? Well, it isn't. Without revenue increases to help pay for our multiple military conflicts and wars, we cannot afford the things the government offers us that we enjoy or take for granted. Such as public transportation, consumer safety, public schools. Or what about the United States Postal Service, which is about to go bankrupt. (Granted, this is an issue that needs legitimate reform, but it needs funding from Congress to complete those changes).
Watch what happens. The committee will release what they will call a great compromise. but if you look closely, you will see that it is a compromise in name only and potentially a political and economic failure in substance.
What do you think?
I completely agree with everything you have said. The Democrats were absolutely steam rolled during the debt ceiling debate. I would however like to be an optimist and hope that despite their terrible track record, they won't concede on EVERYTHING. You talk about them having to defend their core values such as Social Security, Medicare, etc. but the odds of them successfully doing that slim. However, at this point do you not think that they are backed completely against the wall? What exactly is your opinion on all that they will concede?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lindsey in that I'm optimistic. But I'm secretly a cynical nihilist in my spare time and know that there is no winning when your opponents are more than happy to kill the hostages. The GOP seemed to welcome government shutdowns and the economic abyss which surely would have come from a default. How can you really negotiate with that sort of irrationality? It's frustrating to watch.
ReplyDelete@LindseyRuta and @DarrenJaworski
ReplyDeleteI don't think Democrats are backed against the wall at all. At least, not yet. But it can be seen that way.
Democrats are failing to win any of these battles because they are not painting their stance in a way the American people understand. The Republicans are painting their strategy well because they can just sit there and say, "If you elect me I will lower your taxes and you will have more money." What the Republicans leave out, and the Democrats fail to bring up, is that the lowering of taxes makes it more difficult to continue funding the things we take for granted.
If the Democrats take this stance and bring it to the American people, they don't have to concede anything. They need to create a narrative, about people that have used the public system to become successful, the people that would have never had an opportunity for an education or chance without public funding, the women/men taking the publicly funded bus to get to work so they can feed their children.
"Upward mobility," or a fancy term for the American Dream, is made possible because we, as a society, have decided to share a bit of our wealth to make it easier for the next person to make a difference or become successful. It isn't because we have more money for ourselves. In fact, according to economics, the average American's marginal propensity to save (or in terms I better understand, or ability to save money) is about 5 percent of ANNUAL income. If people are given more money through lower taxes, there is a good chance it will be spent and could "bolster" the economy, but will that money good toward a public education or building a road? Probably not. More than likely that money will be spent to pay down our personal debt (which offers nothing to the economy) or on personal gain.
If we don't fight for these taxes to fund the things we take for granted, our children will never have the opportunity to move up the social ranks like so many of us desire. You know why other countries have caste systems (born social rank) instead of class systems? It is because they don't have the ability to use public wealth to provide free education, free highways and roads, subsidized college education, police and fire protection.
We do.
That's the story the Democrats need to take to the people. When they do, the only wall that will be at their back is the millions of American people lining up to support them.
It won't matter how many times the GOP threaten to shutdown the government, because they will have lost the voice of the people, and even if they cause trouble now, they will be swiftly removed by angry voters.
Chase, that is a great point. The democrats and media are not framing the economic situation we are currently in to reflect "reality". The truth of the matter, if there is any, is that the GOP has managed to maintain perfect framing for about 20 years now. The message is clear:
ReplyDelete"We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem." -John Boehner.
With this simple and succinct statement they have essentially derailed the entire process with their obstructionism and outright reckless behavior. It was only 40 years ago that Nixon proclaimed that everyone was a Keynesian.
But this also goes back to the framing and communications issues earlier. If it were framed in the context that Nixon proclaimed, the debate wouldn't be how much we cut, but how much we spend in this deep recession. Instead Reagan economics and the anti-tax radicals have hijacked the entire conversation. What should have been a legitimate negotiation between congress and the president this summer turned into a charade. A charade that didn't solve anything, and only set up future bitter negotiations which will most likely hurt, not help, any recovery.