Republicans reveal picks for debt "super committee"

Updated at 12:25 p.m. ET

Republican leaders in the House and the Senate today announced their appointees to the 12-member, bipartisan congressional "super committee" charged with finding at least $1.2 trillion in budget savings by Thanksgiving.

House Speaker John Boehner said he's tapped House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, to serve as co-chair of the committee. He's also appointing House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., to the committee, as well as House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said he's appointing Sens. Jon Kyl, Ariz., Pat Toomey, Pa., and Rob Portman, Ohio.

In a statement, McConnell said the three senators he's chosen understand the "gravity" of the current economic climate and will bring to the table "the kind of responsibility, creativity, and thoughtfulness that the moment requires."

CBSNews.com special report: America's debt battle

"The American people know that we cannot dig ourselves out of this situation by nibbling around the edges, and I am confident that each of these nominees can be counted on to propose solutions that put the interests of all Americans ahead of any one political party," McConnell said.

Boehner said in a statement he appointed "proven leaders who have earned the trust and confidence of their colleagues and constituents."

The 12-member group, called the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, was created as part of the deal to increase the debt ceiling. Along with the three Republican senators and three House Republicans, the group will be comprised of three House Democrats and three Senate Democrats.

Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid confirmed he is naming Sen. Patty Murray, Wash., to co-chair the committee. He also appointed Sens. Max Baucus, Mont., and John Kerry, Mass., to the committee.

There was some expectation that Boehner would name to the committee House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, author of the controversial House-passed 2012 budget. Ryan released a statement today praising Boehner's appointments and explaining that he asked the speaker to choose others for the job.

"I asked the Speaker not to consider me for the Joint Committee, because only the Budget Committee can write legislation to reform the budget process," he said. "The House Budget Committee plans to complement the Joint Committee's work this fall by holding hearings and marking up legislation to put in place common-sense controls that stop the spending spree in Washington."

The 12-member group has until Nov. 23 to come up with a deficit reduction plan. If a majority approves the plan, the House and Senate must vote on it by December 23. If the plan is rejected, it will automatically trigger $1.2 trillion in cuts in areas like Medicare and national security.

The super committee's goal is to find $1.5 trillion in savings, though it appears it can still meet its mandate if it finds only $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction. The recent downgrade in the U.S. credit rating, however, puts pressure on the committee to seek out greater savings.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi has yet to name her three picks to the committee, but she released a statement last week calling for the committee's work to be open to the press and the public, and webcast on the Internet.

"Any acceptance of the committee proposal will be dependent on the ability of the American people to fully view its proceedings," she said.

In his statement today, Boehner similarly said, "With all that's at stake, I expect that the joint select committee will conduct its work in the open and transparent manner the American people deserve."

From CBS Moneywatch.com:

What's Next for The Economy?
What the Debt Deal Means for Jobs and the Economy

9 Photos

Facts about the debt

[debcalvert]

This super committee should pass a law to make it illegal for any recipient of federal or state medicare/medi-cal funds to set up Political Action Committees to bribe congress not to pursue prosecution. For instance, in the nursing home arena. Sun Healthcare Group Inc avoided prosection for civilly and criminally in my mother's wrongful death and I can prove it with documents. I sued them, yet a corrupt attorney sold me short, I sued him for malpractice and he died 2 weeks later. Daniel Leipold was his name and I believe he was a stooge for the CEO of Sun Healthcare, who passed threats on to me in mediation that if I pursued my case to a jury trial I'd be harmed, because we could prove that CEO's willful misconduct. He should be in prison for running a mafia-like enterprise, complete with witness tampering and threats of bodily harm.

www. sunhealthcaregroupinc.blogspot.com

Deb Calvert, Newport Beach, California

[bmirarck2]

Get rid of Radio Marti and save hundreds of millions of dollars per year for radio/tv signals that are blocked by Castro. What a frickin' waste of taxpayer money!!!

[starving1968-3]

by miamivic2 August 10, 2011 9:48 PM EDT
Democrats will come around sooner or later. They know the realities but don't want to concede that the Tea Party is right by fully agreeing that cuts need to be made. If they could find a way to adopt and triangulate the Tea Party's position if it meant they would win, they would.







Here's something tricky that us liberals call "math":

Annual budget deficit: $1.6 TRILLION.

Republicans "deficit reduction plan" reduces the national debt by $2.1 TRILLION over TEN YEARS.

So the $16 TRILLION deficits over 10 years are going to be reduced by $2.1 TRILLION, and you think that's good enough, huh?

[slappy-mcjohnson]

Interestingly enough, the Federal Reserve is holding $1.6 trillion that the government actually owes itself (not owed to citizens).

Wipe that out and get a year's grace period.

[noloyalisti]

Really, all you have to do is look around and you will see the wreckage from 30 years of failed Republicon policies. What I can't understand is just how stupid people can be to keep wanting more of it.

The last thing we want to do is to reward the corporate criminals for corrupting and destroying America.

[slappy-mcjohnson]

dan1511 -

Are you willing to give up your unfunded government retirement entitlement?

Or are you afraid to put your money where your mouth is?

.

[starving1968-3]

I asked Mort if he was willing to take a cut in pension and medical benefits too, and he wouldn't answer either.

[slappy-mcjohnson]

Good call, starving. dan backed you up!

[starving1968-3]

by dan1511 August 10, 2011 9:31 PM EDT

This is why we need to vote (R) kick Obama out and take the Senate and keep the house. We than can be honest with the American people and come up with real solutions and leadership to solve these critical problem.






The republicans ARE THE REASON that we're in the position that we are today. Their FAILED POLICIES of the early 2000's are a stark and glaring warning that their policies HURT this nation - not heal it.

[starving1968-3]

by dan1511 August 10, 2011 9:31 PM EDT
Thay should make modifications to SS and separate it from the General Fund. What really is going to wreak the country is healthcare costs. Obama focused his first two years on Obamacare...which will put more pressure on SS. Just another program to fund. This is why we need to vote (R) kick Obama out and take the Senate and keep the house. We than can be honest with the American people and come up with real solutions and leadership to solve these critical problem. All hear from the libs is shrill comments like "tax the rich" Screw the Corporations" no REAL solutions. All hear from Obama is blame the other guy or dividing the country with class warfare..he is not a leader.







SS is SUPPOSED to be separate from the general fund, but Bush, Reagan, and other "borrowed" money from the SS fund like it was free, easy, and readily available. Now the system is "short" of funds and the republicans want to kill it. They sure as hell didn't want to kill it when they were "borrowing" from it though, did they?

Obamacare has NOTHING to do with SS. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

As for Obamacare, the health care law was originally designed to CONTROL COSTS but the republicans screamed about the fictional "death panels" and had ALL of the cost controls removed from consideration. Blame them for KILLING something that you're now calling for. (Not for nothing, but when Obama proposed "cost controls", I'd bet $500 that you were screaming about him do that too.)

[starving1968-3]

by dan1511 August 10, 2011 8:48 PM EDT
It is a ponzi system. Out of control spending from BOTH parties depleted the system. It is a pay as you go system...with IOU's. The Tea Party wants to reform the system to fix it...Paul Ryan had a plan but everyone went haywire. Let me ask you this...is it fair to leave a >20T debt for me and my kids....we need to put a burden on our kids so seniors get everything.







The CBO said that if the SS system did NOT have it's funds "borrowed", that it would be fully solvent out until well after 2100. Not 2010 - but 2100 - as in 90+ years from now.

To say that it's a "ponzi scheme" is disingenuous at best. People paid in, that money was invested, and the returns on that money more that kept the system solvent - even through contractions in the economy and recessions.

If not for the republicans MANUALLY BANKRUPTING THEM, they would be fully solvent today. They broke them, let them fix them - NOT KILL THEM, but fix what they broke.

[starving1968-3]

by dan1511 August 10, 2011 8:26 PM EDT
Wishful thinking don't solve problems. SS WILL go broke if it is not reformed and then no one will get a check.






It's not wishful thinking. The republicans "borrowed" the money from the SS system with ZERO intention of paying it back.

Now it's "broke" and they want to use the fact that it's "broke" to kill it altogether - which works for them because they've ALWAYS hated it and wanted it gone from the beginning.



They did the same thing in 2005 with the Medicare Part D overhaul which is NOTHING but a $400 BILLION annual kickback of funds from the medicare system to the health insurance companies. And since that annual amount of money is unsustainable, the republicans want to kill that too.


Quite brilliant on their part: they hate a program so they make sure it goes bankrupt through their legislative failures, and then cite the fact that they are bankrupt as the reason to kill them outright.

[starving1968-3]

by dan1511 August 10, 2011 7:33 PM EDT
by arthanyel August 10, 2011 7:26 PM EDT
That would be Thailand, and you don't want to get operated on in Thailand - trust me on that.

We pay more for medical care than almost every other country on Earth and get less fo it - we don't have to go to ndia for medical treatment to fix that problem.

And you still havent explained how we deal with the fact that both medical sosts and Social Security are being funded out of CURRENT contributions so if you cut them off all the old people will be homeless and die.
_______________________________________________________________
We need to phase SS/MC out. Say people under 55. Means test. Raise the ret age. Adjust COLA. If we don't fix it it will disappear anyway.






And what of the people that will have NO health care coverage and NO money, that have paid for YEARS into both systems?

[arthanyel]

dan1511 - you cant stick your fingers in your ears. A real solution has to work. Just throwing everyone 55 and under to the wolves is not a solution - and all those people are being for the CURRENT retgirees, so that won't work either.

Your point does have a basis in truth, however - over the long term, Social Security as currently structured will not be sustainable. There are multiple answers to that by throwing everyone off the system isn't one of them. Raise the maximum contribution so you get more in. Start paying back the trust fund so it will last longer. Increase the incentives for self-retirement so more people can and will do it (like raising the cap - a lot - of how much you can put into IRA/401K). Add a means test so people that don't need it dont drain funds.

Those are meaningful, workable solutions. Just privatizing it isn't.

[arthanyel]

Mortar: Unfortunately the way the system works people under 55 DO pay for people over 55, and if yuou just stop it all the retired people are screwed. I agree that SS needs reformation, but it needs to be phased in over a LONG period of time and they need to rebuild the trust fund.

A sensible plan is to add a means test, increase incentives for self-retirement (like expanding 401K and IRA type options) so that when people are ready to retire they dont NEED SS, and let the system wither away. If the trust fund was rebuilt and it was done right, then over 25 or 30 years it could be phased out except as a pure welfare program for the small percentage that need it.