|
|
June 19, 2013
|
|
|
|
 ‘Super Committee’ Fails to Overcome Republican DogmaPosted on Nov 21, 2011No, the sun didn’t rise in the west this morning. No, Republicans on the congressional “super committee” didn’t offer meaningful concessions on raising new tax revenue. And no, “both sides” are not equally responsible for the failure to compromise. As usual, the two parties began with vastly different ideas of what it means to negotiate. Democrats envisioned meeting somewhere in the middle, while Republicans anticipated not moving an inch. This isn’t just my spin, it’s a matter of public record: Before the 12-member super committee ever met, House Speaker John Boehner warned that it had better not agree to any new tax revenue. Think about this for a minute. The whole point of the subcommittee exercise was to begin reducing the ballooning national debt, now more than $15 trillion. Closing such a big gap with spending cuts is possible only in the parallel universe inhabited by GOP ideologues, a place where the laws of arithmetic do not apply. Here in the real world—where tax receipts as a percentage of gross domestic product are lower than they’ve been since 1950—it’s ridiculous to think of solving the long-term debt problem without substantial new revenue. Yet the position taken by Republicans in Congress is that tax rates can only go down, never up. To uphold this absolutist principle, they have gone so far as to threaten to send the U.S. Treasury into default. That is basically where the subcommittee talks stood—Democrats ready to give and take, Republicans willing only to take—until the eleventh hour, when Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., presented to his supercolleagues a proposal for tax reform that some commentators hailed as a breakthrough. It was, in fact, nothing of the sort. Advertisement Puh-leeze. While $250 billion sounds like a lot, it’s much less impressive when compared to the super committee’s overall goal of reducing the debt by $1.2 trillion. This would still mean four dollars in spending cuts for every one dollar of new revenue. And Toomey’s number is a drop in the bucket when you look at the $15 trillion total debt—or even the $4 trillion in debt reduction that most analysts believe would really make a difference. With so little new revenue, we would need to make draconian cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security that would radically alter the social contract in this country. Toomey’s proposal on taxes is a breakthrough only if we’re grading on a curve—giving Republicans extra credit for moving an inch, simply because they’ve been so adamant about not moving at all. Democrats, meanwhile, get accused of being intransigent for drawing a line after having moved many, many miles. It’s useful to remember that not all Republicans are so stubborn. Many realize that a balanced approach of spending cuts and tax increases will be needed to address the debt problem—and that these adjustments shouldn’t be made too abruptly, given the fragility of the economic recovery. But anyone who speaks these truths out loud is branded a heretic in Republican circles, where tax cuts are not a matter of policy but of faith. The deal that established the super committee specified that if the superlegislators failed to reach agreement, $1.2 trillion in budget cuts would automatically take place at the beginning of 2013. Is this really better, from the progressive point of view, than some sort of lopsided “compromise” incorporating the Toomey revenue, which would reduce the dollar amount of budget-slashing needed to attain the $1.2 trillion goal? Yes, no deal is almost certainly better than a bad deal. The automatic cuts will be painful, but they don’t touch entitlements—and thus don’t pre-empt the serious discussion we need to have about making sure that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are sustainable. Instead, the Pentagon bears the brunt of the sword-of-Damocles cuts. Already, Republicans are beginning to howl that we need to find some way to avoid damaging our national security. The solution is clear: If we want a military that projects American power around the globe, we need to pay for it. Maybe Republicans will acknowledge that American greatness doesn’t come free. That’s the breakthrough we need.
 TAGS:
|
Guantanamo Prisoner’s Case Demonstrates Unfairness of Military Commissions
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation | Google+
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Lilith, November 24, 2011 at 1:32 am Link to this comment
@Vansusa .... Who are you thanking? If it is for my post about SSI, then thank you for responding. It is very welcomed and much appreciated.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Report thisBy Lilith, November 23, 2011 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment
AN OPEN LETTER AND PLEA TO Eugene Robinson
Dear Mr. Robinson,
I read your article “ ‘Super Committee’ Fails to Overcome Republican Dogma”
I am so frustrated with the silence I get every time I mention, or write to someone like yourself (and congress of course, and the President) concerning a situation that always surprises people when I do get a chance to speak to them.
I am talking about what it is like, truly like to try and live on SSI in this country. Besides living below the poverty level already, we are also mandated by Social Security rules and regulation in how much food we can receive, in total, from Food Banks and other non-governmental people (including family) to $20.00 per month (up until five years ago it was limited to $6.00). It is not $20.00 per food bank, it is $20.00 total from all sources, including food banks, per month. According to So. Sec. regs we must report all gifts (including food once we exceed our $20.00 monthly limit), especially those in the form of clothing and housing assistance (other than section 8), so that it can be deducted from our already poverty level benefit.
I thought I would just put it out there, in bold type as a comment to your Super Committee article to see what would happen. Nothing happened of course, as is the case 99.5% of the time. I did this because people banter around the words “entitlement programs” so blithely without truly understanding who they are talking about, nor what their situations are, or what is really at stake for people like us on SSI and other “entitlement” programs.
It is my hope that you or someone on the Truthdig staff would write an exposé on this situation. Not a one page article, but one that is in depth, one that goes into the punitive aspect of SSI, and the United Nations Human Rights violations many of the SSI regs commit: like limiting access to food, shelter, and clothing.
Here again is what I wrote is what I wrote as a comment to your article.
WE ARE THE 100% - those on SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled)
100% of those on SSI live below the poverty level!
Let me repeat that, 100% of those on SSI live below the poverty level!
2011 FIGURES:
The poverty level for the lower 48 states for one person is: $10,890 ($907.50 per month)
In California a person on SSI gets a MAX. of $830.40 pr month (NO FOOD STAMPS ALLOWED)
In other states that DO ALLOW food stamps, the max. someone on SSI can get is $674.61
WHO GETS SSI AND HOW IS IT PAID FOR:
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):
It is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income; and
it provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter.
These are people who became disabled before they could put enough money into SSA, like: Disabled Children (when they turn 18), Young Adults, The Under Employed, Part Time Workers, .... you get the picture.
These are the people, like myself, who the GOP want to slash even further to keep taxes down, but no one mentions the fact that we already live below the poverty level. That in California we have had our Food Stamps allotment slashed to the minimum (the money added to the max. SSI benefit that makes our benefit the $907.50 mentioned above) and for over 20 years our Cost Of Living increase is stolen by the state (via a loop hole) to balance the budget without raising taxes.
WHAT SAY YOU ALL OUT THERE?
Even Truth Dig has been continuously silent about this all too painful fact!
Report thisBy objective observer, November 23, 2011 at 4:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
as I tell my conservative and liberal friends, President Obama hasn’t been a bad republican president. he sits back and waits while the republican candidates shred each other. the only worry is if President Obama is reelected, will the true left wing socialist that the lefties are waiting for, finally emerge? or will he continue to be the placemat in chief that he has been.
Report thisBy Not One More!, November 23, 2011 at 11:18 am Link to this comment
Mr. Robinson should have began this story with, Once Upon A Time….
How could the democratic party leadership know this would happen when they agreed to the super committee process?
They went along in good faith when creating the super committee, hoping that it wouldn’t come to this. After all, the democratic party has been looking out for the general public’s interest all along. You know, when Clinton signed NAFTA, when Obama tried to end the wars and shut down Guantanamo; when they reformed health care (having health care for all would have just muddied that process), the Wall Street bailout etc.
Let’s get real. Vote third party, don’t give the democrats your consent for their continued undermining and betrayal of the American people (and people around the world). Stop believing such fairytale hogwash that the intent of the democrats was anything other than what was achieved. They were just more devious in getting social programs cut.
“I’d rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for what I don’t want, and get it.” - Eugene Debs
Report thisBy Lilith, November 23, 2011 at 3:07 am Link to this comment
The dead silence I get 99% of the time when I post about what has been happening to those on SSI, especially in California for the past 20 years, shouldn’t surprise me, but it does, every time.
Listen up people, you too will be looking towards SSI and other disability benefits as you get older, especially after you retire. If no one does anything now, it will only get worse. And if you think it is tough now, wait until you need it in the years to come, then who will cry out and stand up with you to demand the same simple humanity we, the disabled on SSI, cry out for today.
By turning your backs on us, you turn your backs on yourselves and your children as well. Wise up people, we ARE your future!
Report thisBy prisnersdilema, November 22, 2011 at 7:37 am Link to this comment
No one in the western hemisphere is surprised by this except the Democratic party, who
shouldn’t have been surprised at all. It’s dificult to believe that Demodrats are the poor
unfortunate victims of the Reublican meenies. Yet again…. And again…
Yet in this instance the Dims are saying that they didn’t see this coming. Which of
course is unbelievable. But does offer them another chance to escape from their
responsibility…
Meanwhile, the wars continue with plans to invade Iran mounting, corporate destruction
of the food we eat, the money we spend, and support of Wall Streets world wide tour of
misery, continues to come from both parties. They have no problem funding their owners
agenda for this country and the rest of the world.
Wall street has stolen this country, and it’s not a secret anymore.
Report thisBy robertaustin, November 22, 2011 at 7:06 am Link to this comment
From what I understand, failure of the super committee to reach an agreement on how to fix the spiraling debt will lead to automatic cuts that will take a big chunk out of the Pentagon’s bloated budget. What’s so bad about that? Let’s root for those “do nothings” to do nothing.
Report thisBy BrooklynDame, November 22, 2011 at 6:58 am Link to this comment
This Supercommittee was bound to fail right from the start. Did anyone doubt
that a smaller group formed from a dysfunctional larger group wouldn’t be able to
get anything accomplished? The Repubs wanted to waste more time and engage
in more finger pointing and that’s exactly what they got.
http://borderlessnewsandviews.com/2011/11/the-not-so-super-committee/
Report thisBy D.R. Zing, November 22, 2011 at 5:41 am Link to this comment
Their karma ran over their dogma.
Report thisBy larkohio, November 22, 2011 at 5:15 am Link to this comment
The Republicans worship Grover Norquist, who, for reasons unknown to me, has convinced them all to sign on to “no new taxes.” They blatantly support him, and the wealthiest among us, which ignores the needs of the rest of us. When will it stop? We have to continue to advocate for change, there are more of us than there are of them.
Report thisBy ardee, November 22, 2011 at 3:58 am Link to this comment
Another in what will be an endless and tireless attempt by Democratic loyalists to excuse them from any responsibility for the failures of our government.
Two parties only, two excuses fro failure, no creativity, no reason to expect anything more in the future.
Report thisBy Lilith, November 22, 2011 at 2:12 am Link to this comment
WE ARE THE 100% - those on SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled)
100% of those on SSI live below the poverty level!
Let me repeat that, 100% of those on SSI live below the poverty level!
2011 FIGURES:
The poverty level for the lower 48 states for one person is: $10,890 ($907.50 per month)
In California a person on SSI gets a MAX. of $830.40 pr month (NO FOOD STAMPS ALLOWED)
In other states that DO ALLOW food stamps, the max. someone on SSI can get is $674.61
WHO GETS SSI AND HOW IS IT PAID FOR:
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):
It is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income; and
it provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter.
These are people who became disabled before they could put enough money into SSA, like: Disabled Children (when they turn 18), Young Adults, The Under Employed, Part Time Workers, .... you get the picture.
These are the people, like myself, who the GOP want to slash even further to keep taxes down, but no one mentions the fact that we already live below the poverty level. That in California we have had our Food Stamps allotment slashed to the minimum (the money added to the max. SSI benefit that makes our benefit the $907.50 mentioned above) and for over 20 years our Cost Of Living increase is stolen by the state (via a loop hole) to balance the budget without raising taxes.
WHAT SAY YOU ALL OUT THERE?
Even Truth Dig has been continuously silent about this all too painful fact!
Report thisBy katy, November 22, 2011 at 1:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
http://www.change.org/petitions/us-congress-tell-the-us-congress-to-
Report thisstop-signing-the-americans-for-tax-reform-pledge
By REDHORSE, November 21, 2011 at 11:38 pm Link to this comment
Only direct action will remove the throbbing pain in your @ss!! Question: What is the only real solution to Fascism? On your feet or on your knees.
Report thisBy Mekhong Kurt, November 21, 2011 at 11:04 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Mr. Robinson, this is a good article, though no doubt some with a different view will [verbally] impale you then set you alight.
I have no idea how people think we can pay for things if we don’t fork over the money to do so. Surely even some of Norquist’s slaves understand that, regardless of their brainless public utterances suggesting they are, indeed, brainless.
Now, before some right-winger takes me to task, first and foremost I am an American long resident abroad—a native rural Texan who until 2010 voted Republican some 70-80% of the time ever since casting my first vote for President Nixon in 1972, when I came of age. I did vote for some Democrats, and even the odd third-party candidate or two along the way, as I’ve always chosen to vote for the person, not the party. Perhaps most importantly, though I live abroad and therefore don’t use any public services except during my rare visits to America, when I add up *all* the taxes I pay to tax authorities at all levels, I pay a fraction under 40 cents out of every dollar I earn (from the U.S., so that’s fair enough; I earn nothing abroad as I am retired). FORTY PERCENT. Yet I’m willing to pay more, if that’s what it takes—but ONLY if EVERYONE pays.
I get no GE multi-billion-dollar tax breaks. The ONLY deduction I get is the personal one, as I’m unmarried with no dependents.
Clearly, I’m no unwashed, homeless, filthy, America-hating commie. And did I mention though circumstances prevented me from entering a career in the military, I was in ROTC three years—during which time I was nominated to West Point? Or that I worked as both a police officer and a security patrol officer for nearly a decade after that? I *put* up, so, by golly, don’t tell me to *shut* up.
Report thisBy Bird48, November 21, 2011 at 10:54 pm Link to this comment
Is there anyone out there, pundit, politician or otherwise who will finally put an end to this perpetual idiocy of bringing Social Security into the deficit debate? Eliminate it completely and the only impact on the fucking deficit is the cost of the administration of the program—the benefits are paid for!
The great big smoking elephant stinking up the room is the precious defense(offense) budget that is more sacred than any other program. That shill O just announced a new base in Australia. I suppose he expects to pay for that by “adjusting” SS payments. Yikes! Stop the insanity! Stop the wars. Close the world-wide bases. Cut back the homeland security crap. Raise taxes on the millionaires and be done with the clap-trap.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, November 21, 2011 at 10:11 pm Link to this comment
The one who controls the relationship is the one who has less to lose. Whether it’s in the bedroom, the living room, the play room, the boardroom or national politics. For 30 year the GOP have played the game of “OK, go ahead!” and Dems have usually backed down because, guess what? They had more to lose.
But the GOP now stands to see its sacred cow, the MIC, get slashed and “entitlements” take minor hits.
NOW, it’s the DEMS who have far less to lose. The Rethugs have been so intransigent for so long and the Dems have bent so far, that now, there’s no place else for them to go, so why bother?
And, since 1994, the GOP has found ways to move the defense spending mostly to Republican districts, so if it gets cut, the voters will be angry and vote their local idiots out of office. And Rethugs are smart enough to know that….....
Report thisCURB STOMP!