prev
next
Mission unaccomplished: Debt panel nears failure
Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, arrives for a meeting with fellow members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction in the U.S. Capitol November 18, 2011 in Washington, DC. / Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
WASHINGTON - It's just about over for a special deficit-reduction supercommittee, which appears set to admit failure on Monday in its quest to sop up at least $1.2 trillion in government red ink over the coming decade.
The bipartisan 12-member panel is sputtering to a close after two months of talks in which key members and top congressional leaders never got close to bridging a fundamental divide over how much to raise taxes. The budget deficit has forced the government to borrow 36 cents of every dollar it spent last year.
In a series of television interviews, not a single panelist seemed optimistic Sunday about any last-minute breakthrough, and aides said any remaining talks had broken off.
Monday is deadline day. The panel officially has until Wednesday to approve a deficit-slashing plan, but under its rules, any plan would have to be unveiled 48 hours in advance.
Lawmakers already taking aim at auto-cuts
Complete Coverage: America's Debt Battle
Instead, it appeared co-chairs Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas would issue a statement declaring the panel's work at an end, aides said.
The two sides had never gotten particularly close, at least in the official exchanges of offers that were leaked to the media.
"There is one sticking divide. And that's the issue of what I call shared sacrifice," said panel co-chair Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., on CNN's "State of the Union."
"The wealthiest Americans who earn over a million a year have to share too. And that line in the sand, we haven't seen Republicans willing to cross yet," she said.
The Pledge: Grover Norquist's hold on the GOP
Republicans said Democrats' demands on taxes were simply too great and weren't accompanied by large enough proposals to curb the explosive growth of so-called entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid.
"If you look at the Democrats' position it was `We have to raise taxes. We have to pass this jobs bill, which is another almost half-trillion dollars. And we're not excited about entitlement reform,'" countered Republican Jon Kyl of Arizona on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"Put a bow on it. It's done," said an aide to a supercommittee Republican.
Failure by the panel would trigger about $1 trillion over nine years in automatic across-the-board spending cuts to a wide range of domestic programs and the Pentagon budget, starting in 2013, according to the Congressional Budget Office. This action, called a "sequester," would also generate $169 billion in savings from lower interest costs on the national debt.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says the required cuts of up to $454 billion to the Pentagon would be "devastating" and leave a "hollow force." Defense hawks of Capitol Hill promise they won't allow them to be that deep.
Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., say they are writing legislation to prevent what they say would be devastating cuts to the military. House Republicans are exploring a similar move. Democrats maintain they won't let domestic programs be the sole source of savings.
In the face of those efforts, President Barack Obama has told the debt panel's co-chairmen that he "will not accept any measure that attempts to turn off the automatic cut trigger," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters last week. The leaders of both parties in the House and Senate have expressed similar sentiments — seemingly making any attempt to restore the money futile.
"Yes, I would feel bound by it," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said recently of the automatic cuts. "It was part of the agreement."
But that doesn't mean rank-and-file lawmakers won't try to block the cuts, or that viewpoints might not change if the right deal is offered — especially in the hothouse atmosphere of next year's presidential and congressional campaign or its aftermath.
With nearly $500 billion in defense spending and an equal amount of domestic dollars at stake, plenty of lawmakers are ready to try blocking all or parts of those automatic cuts, if only to win favor from backers of programs whose funds are on the chopping block.
"I have no doubt that there will be efforts to turn it off," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. "Never underestimate the willingness of politicians to try to avoid making some of the hard choices."
It's unclear how successful such an effort would be. Not only would an Obama veto be tough to overcome, but pressure from the financial markets on politicians to rein in the government's huge budget shortfalls could keep lawmakers from easing the automatic reductions.
The panel's failure also sets up a fight within a battle-weary, dysfunctional Congress over renewing a payroll tax cut and jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed, both of which are set to expire at the end of the year. Both proposals are part of President Barack Obama's $447 billion jobs plan.
Extending the current 2 percentage point payroll tax cut isn't a popular idea with many Republicans, but allowing it to expire could harm the economy, economists say. So too would a cutoff of unemployment benefits averaging about $300 a week to millions of people who have been out of work for more than six months.
Serious negotiations ended Friday after Democrats rejected a $644 billion offer comprised of $543 billion in spending cuts, fees and other non-tax revenue, as well as $3 billion in tax revenue from closing a special tax break for corporate purchases of private jets. It also assumed $98 billion in reduced interest costs.
Earlier exchanges featured a more than $3 trillion plan from Democrats that would have increased tax revenues by $1.3 trillion in exchange for further cuts in agency budgets, a change in the measure used to calculate cost-of-living increases for Social Security beneficiaries, and curbs on the growth of Medicare and Medicaid.
"We put on the table a proposal that required tough compromises on both sides, and they never did that," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., the only House Democrat on the panel to participate in late-stage bipartisan talks.
Republicans countered with a $1.5 trillion plan that included a potential breakthrough — $250 billion in higher taxes gleaned as Congress passes a future tax reform measure. The plan was trashed by Democrats, however, who said it would have lowered tax rates for the wealthy too far while eliminating tax breaks that chiefly benefit the middle class.
Popular in Politics
- FBI director acknowledges domestic drone use
- Obama and Berlin: Faded echoes meet new realities
- Smooth, on-time Obamacare rollout no sure thing: GAO
- Obama on NSA programs: Americans "not getting the complete story" 259 Comments
- House Republicans pass 20-week limit on abortions 429 Comments
- Senators: U.S. must take "more decisive" military action in Syria
- Obama renews push for a nuclear disarmament legacy
- GOP Sen. Murkowski backs same-sex marriage
Most Popular
-
01
-
02
-
03
-
04
-
05
Most Shared
Most Discussed
Of course. But I dont compromise with wrong, I dont compromise with evil either. If it is wrong or evil...I wont do it. Period.
-----------
Mortar, I think (that indicates opinion) that much of what is wrong with our country right now, is that too many people see the world in black and white, good and evil, and the real world is black, white, and many many shades of gray. I'm sure its easier to say "EVIL" and just close your eyes to things, then you don't have to deal with it. Your conscience is clear.
The Kenyan gave the following "marching orders" to the Dumb-ocrat committee members, especially Super-Lib Dumb-ocrat Kerry.
The ORDER:
"There can be NO RESOLUTION or AGREEMENT unless the GOP is willing to trade in the Bush tax cuts."
What a poor excuse for leadership. Reminds me of the 231 times he voted "PRESENT" as a state Senator in Illinois.
Fool us once, SHAME ON HIM. FOOL US TWICE, SHAME ON US.
I do not believe the Kenyan can be re-elected even if he were the only one voting.
It will not happen.
I'd rather have compromise than war.
***********
Exactly what the Dumb Repug wanted. Dumb Dumb Repugs !!
----------
Then you agree that your neighbor being healthy is a good thing for You! A healthy citizenry would make a stronger country.
Fact is you'll either be on your own or you'll have a healthy person to back you up.
Which one do you want?
Lets say we hold a vote on taxes - everyone votes and that richest person at the top counts the votes.
And the end result is a law is passed saying he doesn't have to pay any taxes (so he'll give us all a job)!
But those 9 people get to talking....and they didn't get a job....and they ALL voted NOT to let him get away with not paying taxes......well he must have cheated them!!!
Now what do you think those 9 people are gonna do????????
Zann, despite Invisible's lies and juvenile posts, you tried to make a point here.
Here's the thing. We do have a responsibility as citizens to pay for services rendered on our behalf. Thus, the paver paves us a road that was asked to be built by our representatives, then we pay taxes to cover our portion of that road.
What is NOT the legal or moral function of government is charity. Government cannot do charity. When it tries, it becomes something else. Something VERY evil!
We must pay for services and products rendered on our behalf. What we are NOT obligated to do is to provide money to help others. No one can DEMAND we do that. No one can throw us in jail for not doing so. Because if they can, we are no longer a society that values rights and liberty, but become a society that values slavery and theft.
----------------
If the government is buying the poor people something they don't need, like Jewelry, or something unnecessary like that then I will call it charity.
But as a society we all benefit from a road, a school, a fire department.
And we would ALL benefit from our citizens being healthy.
You can't argue with that - its just a fact.
I didn't say our government should hand anyone money and hope they go to the doctor with it!
And there was a reason our government made ALL of us get those small-pox shots in school. If we ALL are protected individually, it protects us ALL as a group. Come on, its not that hard to understand!
The country is divided also. It is the takers VS. the makers. It is the Rich vs the poor, the old vs the young, Unions vs Business, socialists vs capitalists, libs vs conservatives. I want the conservatives to win!!! I like spending my own money.
-----------
I make money.
I'm not rich, but not the poorest either.
I'm old, but I think young.
I'm Union but have owned a business.
I agree with parts of a socialist ideology and parts of capitalism.
I consider myself a liberal but agree with some conservative points.
ONLY direct democracy - One vote for each issue would allow me to vote accordingly.
Like roads, schools, a fire department, a police department.......HEALTHCARE.
Do Republicans think running this country is a joke. What a statement. Please wake up people. We will never get this country back on track if we keep electing people who do not care about us. They think it is a big joke. While people are suffering, children are going hungry, families are getting thrown out of their homes, that is the attitude of Republicans. Wake up people, for the sake of this country.