What Republicans need to do is not just talk about spending cuts in the abstract, but name some specific cuts. This is where the Dems always get the best of them. They just call the GOP’s bluff. You say you want to reduce entitlement spending? Then say how! Find the most outrageous, wasteful, unproductive thing that Medicare spends money on and cut it. Then let the Dems try and defend it.

We trade our time for money, it’s called work. Debt is agreeing to work for someone else until the money is repaid. America’s debt is enslaving all of us.
If we cut the debt ceiling ten percent each year it will take fifteen years just to be even.
A declining debt ceiling is the best course for the nation.

Why fight today what you can defer tomorrow.

This sort of defeatist thinking is why we always lose. Let it default. People refuse to acknowledge we’re on the road to financial destruction. Playing political games in the meantime does nothing to solve the problem.

Don’t authorize an increase in the debt. Defund the liberal agenda. OH NOES! you cry, then they’ll blame republicans for the resulting chaos. We have no one who can defend our position? There isn’t one astute congressional leader to explain our peril? No one with the wherewithal to understand the problem and explain it? We certainly didn’t nominate a presidential candidate with the stones to explain what we’re doing to our children and grandchildren. Cowards.
We’re just reaping the seeds we’ve sewn with Republican in the General…….

It looks to me that we really don’t have a whole lot of choice but to eventually reform Medicaire to create some sort of market-based price incentives, eliminate most or all of Obamacare, and reform Social Security by raising the retirement age and probably reducing benefits for high earners. Other budget changes aren’t going to make enough of an impact to replace any of those, though they might enable changes in those programs to be made less aggressively. That’s true of both budget changes I like (e.g. eliminating Dept. of Education, Ag subsidies, various corporate welfare, HUD, or other domestic spending programs) or those I don’t (e.g. big tax increases or further cuts to defense spending). There just isn’t enough money to cover the deficits in the big three.

And those changes will have to be made eventually. Either the GOP forces them to be phased in starting in the near future, or more dramatic and sudden cuts will have to be made maybe 10-20 years down the line.

Fat chance. They were going to take a stand on the fiscal cliff. Ooops, we’ll take a stand on the debt ceiling. Ooops, we’ll take a stand on the CR. Ooops, we’ll take a stand on the budget. And on and on and on. How can they take a stand when they don’t stand for anything? Other than (maybe) getting re-elected.

I’m think his point is that there is no true political appetite to cut spending, Thomas Crown made a similar point in his Jan 2nd diary*.

If it’s true that there is no political constituency to cut spending then the debt ceiling debate quickly becomes a tax revenue debate. If there is a strong political constituency to cut spending I think it’s reasonable to start asking for specifics.

What I’m typing isn’t easy for me to put forward. I hope it’s taken in the constructive spirit it’s being written in..

*http://www.redstate.com/thomas/2013/01/02/it-is-time-for-some-honesty/

People support spending cuts in the abstract, but opposition becomes strident once you name specific cuts. Republicans in Congress will refrain from that sort of specific cut because they do not want to have it used against them. Look at how Democrats successfully twisted Bush’s attempt to reform Social Security, and that was without an actual proposal or piece of legislation to vote on.

Unless something changes in the next month or so, it looks like the only meaningful spending cuts will occur because they were not originally expected to go into effect (sequestration).

What change would have come about? Who was there to step into Boehner’s place? You cannot lead an effective coup is there is no one to fill the void. Removing Boehner would have just as likely led to chaos in the caucus, made Republicans in Congress an even greater laughing stock, and possibly even allowed someone like Eric Cantor to become Speaker in the end.

It would have been different if there had been a clear conservative alternative that people would rally around.

“It has provided the Democrats an opportunity to spin the media that even
the Republicans acknowledge we’ll default if we don’t raise the
ceiling, which is why Toomey is doing that.”

I dont buy that because Democrats would be pushing that narrative no matter what Toomey would do or say, and that narrative has been around since 2011. That’s been the narrative: “Republicans want to kill the economy if they dont get their way.”

The Democrats have made debt ceiling = armageddon and whether true or not, the risk of negative outcome from default makes it too dangerous simply to use it to force spending cuts.

I believe the REAL outcome of retreat on debt ceiling means the sequester WILL happen and MUST happen. To undo that is to undo the ‘gains’ made in Aug 2011, whatever they were.

“That said, if Republicans will not pick a fight on the debt ceiling
(though they should attach a number to it), they absolutely must fight
on the continuing resolution.”

I agree 100%. I also think that it’s far better to do the ‘small debt ceiling raise’ than throw in the towel on it, and use the debt ceiling for at least a FEW key leverage points.

1) Get a budget agreement that cuts the spending. NO long-term debt ceiling raise with real reforms a la Boehner rule (no raise without equivalent cuts).

2) Force real budgeting and make the senate pass a budget.

3) Full Faith and Credit to MAKE SURE the debt ceiling becomes a ‘shutdown’ not a market downer. This is important because May 18 is not far away and if Obama and Reid are not serious about budget and spending controls, then the govt will shutdown.

” They absolutely must fight on defunding Obamacare even at the risk of a government shutdown.”

Agree 100%. Even if this was not a final outcome, at LEAST make it “this is our position” and answer the inevitable “well, what will you cut?” line with “We will repeal and defund obamacare”.

“That’s where I am. We lost the debt ceiling argument going into the
fight. We better regroup quickly for the continuing resolution and
budget fight.”

We have no lost the debt ceiling argument per se. We are deciding to use a small increase with small request/leverage. Smarter than a big fight we’d get bloodied up in. We simply dont have the political capital to force a big fight right now. The short term debt ceiling is like the Russians fighting Napoleon. Its a ‘fighting retreat’ trying to figure out how to wear down an enemy that has invaded your land and would beat you if you dared have open battle. As such, its far better than capitulation or defeat, but as you note, it better be a prelude to getting organized and mounting a REAL defensible position, or we are in big trouble.

The Russians deferred open battle until Borodino which was a draw and
then just harried the larger Napoleonic army, until the weather wore
Napoleon down in winter. Republicans need to get the Democrats and Obama in a situation where they defeat themselves on the budget by forcing THEM to defend unpopular choices. Hammering on the unacceptable deficits and lack of budget restraint and massive tax increases again and again and again and again until every single America is fully aware and sick of Obama’s massive debts.

Sam Houston did the same thing vs Santa Anna … the battle of San Jacinto that won Texas its freedom was over in 20 minutes … and it was won because Houston waited for his real oppty.

Obama was re-elected with a NARROWER majority. He didnt win the House. On economy, deficits and budgets, he is NOT right and his positions are NOT popular … just more popular than the Republicans he and media incessently bash.

I disagree with those who say “we need specifics” No, we dont need
specifics, there’s plenty of that, we need more Americans who AGREE WITH
US to demand DC does something about the over-spending.If we want to win on policy, it starts by winning the argument. Shall we spend our childrens inheritance? Should we continue spending 40% more than we did in 2007? Forget specifics for a second, get 60% of Americans agreeing with your basic position and THEN you will have the political capital to actually HOLD a position such as “We wont raise the debt ceiling without a cut in the deficit”.

Use spending as leverage on budget, get small wins where you can and force the victory only after you laid the groundwork and won the argument. We have to have the battle on our terrain not theirs. THAT’S OUR PATH TO WINNING.

I could go many different ways.

The revolutionary in me says shut it down.

The ponzi-scheme Alexander-Hamilton in me says raise the frigging debt ceiling; just grow the economy.

It’s wonderful to be a 1960s person (turned 15 in 1960). One can be a revolutionary, right or left. Or one can just drop out.

That Dems want tax hikes isn’t a secret … they made it a central theme to their presidential campaign and tax hikes were part of the fiscal cliff deal, i can GUARANTEE you that it will be characterized as a rich-fat-cat-tax hike that will protect the middle class and that the MSM will applaud Obama for taking ‘tough choices’

Every conservative should admit jealousy towards Obama and liberals: they have a leader who shamelessly advocates their ideals … what do we have? erick erickson? not enough

NO ONE MAKES MORE THAN THOSE IN PRIVATE LIFE

uh, check out the major wall street donors for ‘our’ leadership in the house and senate … they make more money than that

I agree with giving the GOP a pass on raising the debt ceiling and have been advocating passing a one-year debt ceiling (with monthly incremental cuts) as it would be a PR nightmare not to do so. I didn’t want to watch O and the MSM ridicule us for grandstanding and then caving again on another losing battle. I too agree on leaving the seq. in place and not doing another CR until we get a budget passed and enacted.
.
But I take issue with the GOP on their debt ceiling strategy and message: They’ll raise it for 4 months to avoid a fight now and will cut their pay if they don’t pass a budget. That is so childish and has no teeth for the D’s to act on passing a budget, which should be their goal.
.
This is beyond weak:
1. kicking the can for 4 months will cause more uncertainty in the markets
2. Make the clean raise dependent on PASSING a budget, not a pay cut.
.
I don’t understand their reasoning, either pass a clean budget or exact concessions. In this case they’ve accomplished neither….as usual.

Completely agree. I’m just not sure there is anything they think they can win much less fight for it. Just don’t see a real desire in Boehner or McConnell to change anything. They are both basically cowards and too rinoish to really care.

Great points JKnight, especially the laughing stock comment. I want him replaced too but not at all costs that could hurt the Party more than help it. He’s a horrible leader that can’t seem to learn his lessons that are dividing the Party; you don’t lead by punishing dissent, you lead by listening and building consensus. And no thank you to Cantor as Speaker!

The problem in a nutshell is the nuts. The real problem in and for the GOP is that they have no leadership. They have figureheads and pretenders, but no real leaders in position to lead. Those in positions of leadership are merely windsocks. They follow the wind, but don’t direct it or create it. Those who would lead in the right direction are the nails that stick out which are hammered back down by those who currently hold power in the party. The thing that scares the so-called leadership the most is that an actual leader will emerge and show that the so-called emperors have no clothes. The single best cure for the GOP’s problems at this point would be to primary all of the so-called leadership who are in reality spineless weasels who would rather be “leaders” of the minority party than to actually lead the majority party. If we want a majority in the House and Senate, and the occupier of the White House to be GOP, we must primary these losers and replace them with fighters who have the courage to do what is right, not the tears of ineffective posers.

The reason the Dims haven’t passed a budget in years is that they don’t want one. A budget is work, and there may be things that end up in it they won’t like. So, they have existed on Continuing Resolutions since Obummer took office, because that way none of their supporters is hurt–they each keep getting what they have been getting, and nobody gets hurt. Then they hide the increases for some supporters in other bills that have some popular support and the spending increases while they can go home and campaign on “holding the line” on spending. It also helps the GOP in the same way, so they support the CRs while loudly criticizing the Dims for the lack of any actual budget.

Why fight today when you can chicken out and cave tomorrow?

We cannot forget that we’re discussing political strategy here, not policy.

If we are discussing a political strategy, should we not consider something that is possible? NON discretionary (budget category) spending is about $1.8 out of the $2.2 trillion that we take in as taxes and our military spending of about $800 billion is considered discretionary. So, from a practical standpoint, if they don’t raise the debt ceiling they have to completely shut down all Federal departments AND cut the military in half. How does anyone see that as a successful outcome politically?

Therefore, I certainly agree that we need to focus on the CR and budget. Yet, I have not heard any leadership from the Republicans on this. And, while I don’t claim to understand the game well, what I do know is that if you are getting your ARSE kicked in a game you have to change your strategy and become more aggressive not more defensive.

So, since our cries of NO MORE TAXES and less spending have not roused the public outcry we seek, maybe we should change our tactics and show Americans what reality is. Maybe the House Republicans should put forth a budget that includes the INCREASED TAXES it will take to cover the spending over the next five years. Let them show the country that EVERYONE will have to pay 65% to maintain the programs we have in place. Let the Dems vote on it. See what the market thinks about actually forcing Americans to pay their bills. Let it get scored by the CBO and require an analysis on the economic impact to GDP.

WE have to stop chasing our tails around, and around, in circles. IF we believe that spending is the problem, show Americans the truth. Because historically, they generally get to the right answer.

I think this is a trap. While the Senate can pass a budget resolution with 51 votes, it cannot take effect without 60 votes to invoke cloture, or a conference vote with the House. So what the Dems can do is pass a liberal budget resolution, and then say “See we did what you wanted.” This then makes it incumbent on the House GOP and the filibustering Senate GOP to either cave or get painted as obstructionists. The GOP will of course cave and compromise, because otherwise they will shut down the government and look like villains. Or, more likely, they’ll shut down the government for a couple weeks and then cave, making certain to not only look like villains, but also be sure to lose any spending reforms in the process.

Budget bills cannot be filibustered. They only have to pass it with 51 votes.

The way it works is the House passes a budget, the Senate passes a budget, and then they meet in a conference committee to come up with a compromise bill. The conference committee is appointed equally by the House Chairman and the Senate Majority leader. After they approve a compromise bill, it goes back to the House and Senate for an up-or-down vote in each. In other words, there is not a lot of room for shannagins.

If the Dems try to throw out a piece of garbage bill, the GOP has something with which to hang the Dems.

Again I ask you, If the Dems have everything to gain from this, then why have they postponed it for nearly four years and why did it take a threat just for them to propose a budget?