« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

They Are Not Serious

Senator Helms once said, “Compromise, hell! That’s what has happened to us all down the line — and that’s the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?”

The Democrats and Republicans in Washington may be trying to compromise, but they just aren’t that serious. They really aren’t. And now a bunch of House Republicans are going wobbly, backing down from holding the line, and willing to take John Boehner’s plan — a compromise wherein they are compromising only with themselves.

According to Forbes, a ratings downgrade would be worse than a technical default. Unfortunately, sources who have spoken to Standards & Poor tell CNN’s Erin Burnett that John Boehner’s plan — the one Allen West and others are lining up to support — would cause the U.S. to lose its AAA credit rating.

Why? No, ti has nothing to do with John Boehner embracing the McConnell idea of letting the President raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval and then letting Congress vote to “disapprove”. But it does that too.

No, it’s because the credit reporting agencies have said the U.S. Congress must show real cuts of $4 trillion or more. John Boehner’s plan doesn’t even come close in real dollar terms — excluding accounting gimmicks the credit agencies are not buying. John Boehner’s plan could best be called “Punt, Kick, and Pass.” It punts the problem to another stupid commission, kicks the can down the road, and passes more debt onto future generations.

So here is the great conundrum for the House GOP. Reid’s plan cannot pass the House. John Boehner’s plan probably can. Ultimately, John Boehner’s plan and Harry Reid’s plan are pretty close and both would probably result in a credit downgrade.

I suspect the House and Senate will use Boehner’s plan as a compromise and get it passed. House Republicans may think they’ll get another bite at the apple, but this could be it. But then, when the credit agencies downgrade our credit, the GOP will get the blame because it was the GOP’s plan that passed. Don’t believe me? I’d just point out Harry Reid intentionally opted not to have the debt ceiling fight back in December because he wanted Republicans to own it.

In fact, there is only one plan ready to go that meets the credit agencies’ demands for substantial cuts. It is called “Cut, Cap, and Balance.” It is only four votes shy of a majority in the United States Senate.

John Boehner has succeeded in dividing conservatives, even though many of them acknowledge Boehner’s plan will cause a credit downgrade.

It need not be this way. House Republicans could hold the line. They’ve compromised enough. Why not fight instead? Fight for cut, cap, and balance. it’s the only plan to avoid a credit downgrade.

The House GOP need not compromise. President Obama cannot afford to be the first President in American history to witness a default or credit downgrade. We’ve had 17 commissions in 30 years to cut our debt and the debt has gone up $13 trillion. What the House GOP is proposing is more of the same.

I interviewed Donald Trump last week and he pointed out the House Republicans are terrible negotiators. He said if the House GOP were fighting the revolutionary war, we’d still be British.

Instead of compromising with themselves, Republicans should hold the line on cut, cap, and balance and fight on.

COMMENTS

  • Spiral

    Boehner said on Fox News Sunday that he does not want to get anywhere close to default.

    And that is the central question in this disagreement we are having.

    Is default an option, a means of cutting spending by 40 percent immediately?

    (And for this discussion let’s define default as a failure of the federal government to pay its legal-financial obligations even if it does pay interest and principal on its debt).

    Those who think that default is an option view Boehner and McConnell much differently than those who think that default is not a serious option.

    We’ve heard both Boehner and McConnell say that they do not see default as an option, a means of cutting federal spending by 40 percent immediately.

    If you look at things from that perspective, Boehner isn’t being a coward. He’s being sensible. If he wants to avoid default, his leverage over the Democrats is limited.

  • http://aposematic.wordpress.com aposematic

    Hold on to your wallets, we are being played big time…again. When Pelosi says she welcomes the new austerity you can bet the house your clock is being cleaned…again. When Reid says the D’s gave the R’s everything they wanted you can bet the senate you are being fleeced…yet again. The base line is 1.6T deficits per year basically forever (until the money runs out). 3, 4, or 5 T in cuts over ten years is .3, .4, .5 T in cuts per year. That’s 1.3T, 1.2T, 1.1T in new deficit spending forever (until the money runs out). The average deficit per year for the 8 years of Bush II was 223B (that’s Billion not Trillion) and the D’s screamed bloody murder at how Bush II was destroying the country (full disclosure: I agreed). Under Obama’s 2.5 years the average yearly deficit is 1,200B (1.2T=1,200,000,000,000) and counting and the D’s think that’s not only hunky dory but not enough spending and the Media/Press agree. On top of this the Fed, since TARP under Bush II and a D Congress in 2008, has loaned the Worlds banks 16T of America’s future $ in an effort to prop up the World’s economy. (note:These are mostly short term and lots have been paid back and loaned again. Kind of like limiting out your credit card, paying it off and then limiting out again over and over.) A lot of this 16T is in US Treasuries keeping US afloat. Basically the World is using the “full faith and credit of the US” to prop up the “full faith and credit of the US” to prevent the World from collapsing into a red hole. It would be really nice to own a family farm right about now for survival purposes but even that would be subject to takeover for the common good. Remember Castro shooting all of the farm owners after the Revolution in Cuba and Stalin confiscating all private farms and turning them into collectives resulting in ten’s of millions starving. My question: How long before the US checks start bouncing (Banks refusing to accept them. The money runs out.)?

  • dkm466

    Compromising mean the left loses, the right loses while Washington steals. Washington wants your permission to steal your money If Washington gets your money they have enslaved the population for every generation from now on. This is the last chance you’ll ever have to remain free.

    For God Sake don’t compromise. Say No to Debt Ceiling and Stealing. Cut,Cap, Balance, VOTE

  • anjinconsulting

    after the downgrade when interest rates rise. More and more investors will shuck their U.S. Bonds, and the Treasury will print more money to buy the bonds that no one else will buy. When inflation kicks in, we’ll be back in the Carter years and if we dont get this under control now, we’ll become another Weimar Republic.

    It is a waste of time and effort to discuss the methodology or the rationale being used by the “Republican leadership” in this fight and frankly, it doesn’t really matter; it is time to remove them and their supporting party structure.

  • jimmyneutron

    I think we are in danger or losing sight of the forest as we argue over the trees (clever turn of phrase huh?? :) Not really but it is early so forgive me.
    We currently are so deeply in debt and are adding to that debt at such a prodigious rate that the only word one can use is unsustainable. I hate to use the overused household analogy, but I must – if this were one of us in our household we would either be forced to reduce spending or we would need to increase our income via a second job or perhaps simply a new job as a congressman or Obama Czar and then we could retire as a millionaire in no time at all! Be that as it may, the key point is that we simply have to balance our books.
    Unfortunately the only way to do that is to cut spending or raise taxes. I believe that most here have read enough Hayek, Sowell, etc to understand that raising taxes, especially on the terrible ‘rich’ is counter productive and will, in the long run, lead to a reduction in revenue and eventually to a reduction in overall wealth and prosperity of the nation.
    This then leaves cutting spending. And not just any spending either. To actually begin to turn this economy around we will need to kill Obama care and we will need to seriously reform entitlement programs. We simply have no choice because we can not go on for long being the brokest nation is history. Eventually the laws of economics will catch up to us and there will be a real crash and real, severe reduction in living standards.
    Thus, the reason that some are arguing that we hold the line and demand real, verifiable, substansive spending cuts is that they see the ugliness of the future and want to ensure that we take the correct road here.
    If we do a deal as usual and get promised spending cuts and business goes on as usual we will be hurting ourselves in the long run. There is no guarantee for tomorrow folks. Sure, we may lose this battle, but many of believe that we fight it here and now. We need to ensure that there are no ‘usual deals’ being cut and that the people in Washington understand that this time they need to fight to at least begin to turn this ship around. I believe that we understand that we may not get all we want because we only have the House, but that does not mean we have to fold and give in the first time they raise the ante. No. We must stand firm and fight and who knows, we may see the results seen by many a military commander who, instead of waiting for the perfect scenario and situation to arise (ie winning the Senate and oval office) attacks and makes the best of what he has.
    We may win the senate and oval office next year, but what good will that do us if we have not rid these people of that spirit of compromise and surrender of principles – they need to begin learning how to do the right thing now.

  • kajun65

    of the American Dollar’s complete. It only takes 7 years to get credit back after going Bankrupt.

  • steve010

    A day after Obama?s non-speech to the American people, a story about Netflix raising prices gets more views than the story about Obama?s speech.

    July 22nd, according to Geithner, was the very, very last day to get a bill passed to avert disaster in the markets. Then we heard, Sunday night, the 24th, was the drop dead date for an agreement or the ?Asian? markets would implode. Now, after the Horsemen didn?t ride over the financial markets on the 25th, BHO and Geithner are still demanding tax increases to get a deal.

    Today the Dow futures are up and the Asian markets are kind of flat and the dollar is up over the Euro, so maybe this means that, What does this mean?

  • http://jakespeaks.wordpress.com/ Jake W

    Unlike McConnell, I think Boehner’s heart is in the right place, he just has gone about this entirely the wrong way.

    Thanks for the great post. Trump’s analogy is right, if you ask me. I’ll have to remember that Jesse Helms quote.

  • steve53

    Like Erickson wrote, the House presented a plan and a good one. Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats ‘tabled’ the plan. They would not even discuss it. Obama threatened to veto the plan. Why? Because it required Washington to balance its budget like every state in the union is forced to do. So who would be at fault for default?

  • bk

    If so that wouldn’t be such a bad thing, unlike the usual “triggers” that cause us to spend more.

    But troubling to me is that it sounds like it also gives Obama an automatic debt limit increase later without needing approval from both houses.

    The real killer though is that you know this “commission” will be made up of something like Gillibrand, Harkin, Wyden, Ellison, Jackson Lee, and Nadler on the Democratic side. All we’d need is a Snowe, Lugar, Walter Jones, or Diaz-Balart on our side and we’re royally screwed.

  • silentcal2012

    People need to stop talking out of both sides of their mouth. Obama and Reid will never agree to ccb. Auto default will happen with severe reputcussions. We need more adults and less nihilistic panderers.

  • avgjo

    what are we going to do about it, other than lament it? When will Boehner realize that this compromise malarkey will result in an at-best tenuous political career? the declaration by Mr. Erickson and other good folks against McConnell came way too late, after he bent over for Obamacare and in the lame-duck. Primarying him out may help, but he got away with this for a long time, and it’s well possible he would have retired anyway. And the damage is done.

    There seems to be a lag between their (our elected reps) stupidity and our action. We wait until after the damage is done to do anything. What good is that? If we had made it clear to Boehner LAST TIME that any further compromise would result in a political tanning, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation. After that last capitulation, I heard him on Hannity and elsewhere; the man was so condescending! He seemed to think we’re a bunch of dummies who need lecturing. But based on our collective response to him so far, I’m not sure his perspective is entirely unjustified…

    I’ve noticed that many here and elsewhere mock Obama’s lib base for the fact that no matter how BO snubs them, they’ll not speak against him and they’ll vote for him no matter what. I know we’re not quite as bad, but sometimes it seems hard to tell the difference. I see some people making apologies for Boehner, saying this is not the hill to die on, 2012 is. I wonder how many of those people were saying during the Great Budget Capitulation ‘this is not the hill to die on, the debt ceiling is.’ I also wonder what they’ll say next year when Boehner capitulates again…? And he will capitulate, because the other part of our side, the ones who are correctly critical are too parsimonious in their passion; they hold back promises of primarying, withdrawal of support and all that sort of thing until it’s too late. In short, Boehner was not and has not been given incentive to stop his capitulation; he will do it again. Then will come what should have been done earlier, but the damage will have been done. Again.

    I may well get flamed, even banned for saying this. But it needs to be said.

  • morninginamerica

    Forget all the whining about a debt downgrade, there are lots of letters left to go before a default, and concentrate on growth. Lower taxes, cut regulation, and get out of the way!

    The deficit might have to go up for a few quarters too. What would we do then, stop growth? Get real! The only thing that has ever worked for the USA is growth in a market of free individuals.

    So far, all the media thinking is negative and from the creditor’s point of view. The Democrats will do anything to keep spending and weaken the private sector; so, let’s not help them.

  • BA Cyclone

    If you don’t have the courage to call your opponent’s bluff, then you have no business being in the game in the first place.

    If Boehner is mostly worried about “getting the blame” then he has already lost. That’s marketing, not leadership.

  • BA Cyclone

    Boenher and the House need to own it fully and re-market that as acceptable to EVERYONE except the Dems in the Senate and the one at 1600.

    Pass it again out of the House, and walk away. The marketing has to be there: THIS is the deal that will avoid default AND all those fearful downgrades. If the Democrats don’t like it, they don’t like compromise and they can own what happens next.

    HOLD THE LINE. Our future depends upon this.

  • charlesmartel

    Would that the GOP “leaders” had your sense. Erickson for Congress in 2012!

    Obama can’t risk default or downgrade. No matter how many speeches he gives, no matter how hard the MSM spins it, the default/downgrade will have occurred on his watch. It’s his to own. Blaming it on anyone else will just demonstrate how entirely powerless and ineffectual he is.

    The American people have surprised me to this point with their resilience and willingness to stand up to this administration, and to fight with their wallets and their votes. They did it in 2010, they’ll do it again in 2012. All the GOP needs to do is give them something to fight for, the hope that if we win in 2012, things will start to change for the better.

  • nelsdr

    This president is NOT about politics, reelection, Etc. As long as we continue to pretend that ?this president? is about anything other than remaking (destroying) the USA we will continue to under estimate the enemy! In today?s politics compromise is capitulation not a road map to our survival!

  • lakeworthcane

    Hers

  • gekster

    It was a campaign speach.
    He has to get re-elected to finish the job he started.
    Why do you think he wants a debt celing increase to go past the next election, when all the others have been in 6-8 month increments.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    That is going to happen irrespective of any agreement. We have simply increased the debt burden to substantially since Obama took office and this was inevitable. Obama owns the downgrade and it should be pinned on him like a Scarlet Letter.

    Nonetheless, I am not worried since the market has already priced in that downgrade Current yields already reflect it and I don’t believe the market will move significantly with the actual announcement. There is nowhere else to go. US Treasuries are still the safest bet in the world.

  • mdlooman

    the ADDITIONAL debt that every person in the US is responsible for is $4,000.00 (according to a BBC news report yesterday). This is in addition to the tens of thousands we already owed. This $4,000 figure is the per person amount. The household amount would be closer to $10,000. Besides this almost half of all households pay no federal taxes. So, here’s the point… a bond rating agency would be crazy NOT to warn lenders that the US appears less able to pay back the money loaned to it. May God help us!

  • vamoose

    I emailed both of my senators, Warner & Webb, this morning urging them too resurrect and pass CCB.

    The president is taking his case to the American people and has asked them to call their congressmen and senator. Let’s turn the tables on the president. Make sure when Washington hears is a resounding “No!” to the Dems pseudo-plan and “yes!” to CCB.

  • rayhinkle

    I am not convinced that our country should over react to “ratings agencies” demand for this type of action. After all, who is pulling their strings. Critical analysis of the situation is required. i.e. who benefits, who does not. Banking is about making money. Yes this may mean more cost due to higher interest rates, but that is how they have been doing it for longer than I can remember. So, which is worse, the value of the dollar as it relates to other currencies or a higher cost of interest due to a devalued dollar. So…. now what! It appears to me that a principled solution is worthy, but getting there will not be a straight line. That is a reality!

  • jaykali

    It is very possible (and sorry if this is obvious) that the GOP plan is the only plan to save us from a downgrade in credit rating. If the GOP can make that argument they’d have a lot more leverage bc then the Democrats have to explain why they are passing plans that will still lead to a downgrade in credit rating.

  • lakeworthcane

    Until we fix it–unless we fix it–we’re going to keep getting the same results.

    The best thing we could do–just for starters–is somehow limit federal, and perhaps even state and local, politicians to one term in office (and, for good measure, eliminate the lifetime benefits they get for having served even just one term). These people stay in office for decades and start to see themselves–and worse, their constituents and even the news media start to see them–as kings, queens and emperors with absolute, unlimited, unquestioned authority.

    They don’t fight for the voting citizens. They fight among themselves for power and authority.

    Maybe if these self-serving wretches weren’t so worried about getting re-elected–maybe if they knew they couldn’t be re-elected–they’d be more willing to run the nation responsibly instead of in a way that’s best for them.

    So, if we could take away that prize–that unlimited time in office and all the power and money that go with it–it’d likely change the way these megalomaniacs approach their jobs; it might even deter the megalomaniacs from seeking the jobs in the first place.

    The thing is, the way the law is now, they’re the ones who’d have to limit their terms in office. That’s like expecting a dog to put itself on a diet.

    But my first reaction every day to our political system is that it’s become an impossible mess, and we need to throw it out and start over again: build a new system that diffuses power to the local level (think of Aristotle’s “city-states”) and keeps it diffused, and changes those who have it on a regular basis.

  • jaykali

    Isn’t politics about doing as little as possible to nudge the can down the road a few inches before a train completely obliterates it?

  • Waderic

    but there’s no evidence to suggest it.

    If only Boehner was circulating this watered down plan only to have everyone realize that unless they go all the way to the “extreme” CCB, we’re going to lose our credit rating.
    Drastic measures need to be taken to save a sinking ship. Compromising to half measures lets the boat sink.
    I wish they would run the numbers to show how much it would cost the economy and everyday working class people if we lose our credit rating. I would guess it costs more than the proposed cuts in CCB.
    Someone (besides Paul Ryan) has got to be able to make a fiscal argument for why a half measure is as good as no measure at all.

  • usastandup

    Nothing but CCB will stop this slide down to third world status. Our credit rating is already toast but CCB may limit or minimize major damage. The current politicians are playing on fears and the Speaker caved. A last minute vote by the Senate will be forced if the Speaker would just hold the line and say the answer is already in the Senate. Not that I really care at this point but a plus to this would be the Senate Dems and the Prez would be the accountable parties. They had the solution. If they don’t like the CCB bill they can amend it or create a new bill later. This is a Dog and Pony show. Dingy has already left that as a option by avoiding outright defeat of the CCB bill.

  • bgintn

    Congressman Fleischmann Sir,

    Doing as Obama requested.

    Contacting you and really trying to be civil after hearing his Marxist dribble.
    The Cloward?Piven strategy and it?s final phase of the total destruction of wealth which will collapse the system keep coming into my mind.

    The Boehner debt limit proposal.

    There is one fundamental problem with the entire plan. Unlike the actual CCB plan, this proposal would hand the Democrat wolves the keys to the spending hen house first, while promising unverifiable and unenforceable cuts later. The bottom line is that once we return the federal credit card to the Democrats, they will no longer have any incentive to vote for a balanced budget amendment.

    The second tier of the plan, the 18th debt commission, is the most problematic. It is a double-edged sword of predictable failure. If the commission comes up with a good deal that implements free market entitlement reform without raising taxes, Democrats won?t be compelled to vote for it. If they come up with lousy reform, and or raise taxes, well.. the entire commission would have been a failure. Worse, we would be forced to raise taxes by a commission of our own making, or be called out for duplicity.

    The Cut, Cap, and Balance Coalition (CCB)will not be support Boehner?s plan, the group just announced. According to their statement, CCB is a set of principles not subject to negotiation, and Boehner’s plan doesn?t stack up. See the statement below.

    ?As we stated this morning, Cut, Cap and Balance is not merely a legislative framework, it is a series of principles. Principles are not subject to negotiation. Unfortunately, the Speaker?s plan falls short of meeting these principles. Perhaps most troubling is the proposed Congressional Commission. History has shown that such commissions, while well-intentioned, make it easier to raise taxes than to institute enduring budget reforms. Additionally, a symbolic vote on a balanced budget amendment at some later time minimizes its importance, as it will not be tied to an increase in the debt ceiling. A BBA that allows a tax increase with anything less than a 2/3 super majority is not a serious measure.

    ?The fact remains there is only one plan that has passed the House with bipartisan support that will permanently end America?s debt problem and that is the Cut, Cap and Balance Act. This Coalition is willing to sacrifice much in return for a permanent solution to this issue, but we will not sacrifice the fundamental principles of CCB. To be clear, we are not criticizing the Speaker; however, we cannot support his framework, and we urge those who have signed the Pledge to oppose it and hold out for a better plan.?

    The credit rating agencies will cut the credit rating of the United States. Already the Obama Administration is privately advising that a credit downgrade is likely no matter what.

    The President and Democrats will blame the Republicans and make the very persuasive case that they went with the GOP?s plan to avert a crisis and it wasn?t good enough, consequently higher interest rates are the Republicans? fault.

    If the GOP is going to get the blame, they might as well go for broke and force Cut, Cap, and Balance.

    The Reid rival debt limit plan.

    Details of Reid?s spending cuts, are as follows.

    * $1.2 trillion in discretionary spending, including both defense and non-defense spending
    * $100 billion in mandatory savings
    * $40 billion in Program Integrity Savings, by reducing fraud and abuse in federal programs
    * $30 billion in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reforms
    * $15 billion in Spectrum sales
    * $10-15 in Agricultural reforms
    * $1 trillion from winding downs the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

    (SHAM!!!!!!!) Iraq is winding down anyway. The cut back in Afghanistan all ready going on.

    * $400 billion in interest savings ? $220 from discretionary spending cuts and $180 from $180 billion from the Wars saving

    (Read above) (Double Counting??)

    Just more smoke and mirrors.

    It is very plain that neither side is interested in actually reducing the size of government. Nowhere in the negotiations has anything been mentioned about eliminating any programs, government departments, or subsidies.

    Any political deal that meets one side?s demands up front and promises to meet the other side?s demands in the future is a bad deal for the side that bets on the outcome. Congress has no legal obligation to deliver on its promises.

    In other words, with the exception of contractual obligations which bind the government of the United States, promises of future action or inaction by Congress have no legal force.

    The reality is that every act of Congress that has not created a contractual obligation can be undone by the Congress that enacted it or by any future Congress.

    Please remember, When you compromise with evil you are stupid.
    The outcome of the compromise ends up being both stupid and evil.

    So, sir in my opinion, NO! to both plans.
    The Cut, Cap and Balance is far from enough, but it is the best so far.

    Sincerely,

  • 6eorge Jetson

    wouldn’t be as bad as advertised.

    A smaller entity of, say, a couple hundred billion outstanding (e.g. Ford) getting downgraded relative to the benchmark? Pensions, etc. have (arcane) rules that cause real flows of money from a downgrade event (from the agencies that brought you the AAA CDO that trades for a few pennies on the dollar.

    But the benchmark itself? $10 Trillion? (Of real Debt Held by the Public.) It seems to me that it the rules would have to be changed. What’s the old (updated) saying? He that is owed a billion is owned by the lender. He that owes $10 Trillion owns the lender.

    I guess the only new information would be the inability of the Congress to cut the deficit in the face of a headline event.

  • blh1976

    does the Boehner plan, in essence, give Obama a clean debt ceiling hike? Aren’t the “cuts” and promise of a BBA vote simply smoke and mirrors. It seems as if Obama has played our leaders, and they still have no idea.

    In a compromise agreement, both sides should get something of value out of the deal. In this case, we got nothing – not even a “thank you, ma’am.” We’ve been used; we’ve been abused. It’s time to change the negotiating team.

  • 6eorge Jetson

    But on the other hand, much of the rest of the world would love to see the US dollar’s place as the reserve currency replaced with a basket of currencies including their own. That’s the real event to fear, and a downgrade could help with the international politics of effecting that change.

  • 6eorge Jetson

    The GOP should run on eliminating the Depts of Education and Energy. Eliminating ~$50 billion and ~$25 billion every year would represent a non-trivial chunk.

  • http://www.gopmall.com janesmoote

    This is not a game I want to play. Not a game that should even exist. I am disgusted.

  • alreadyexists

    For most people, it appears that we have been traveling a long and winding road during the past few weeks of debt negotiations. This is a misperception. Boehner agreed to cave on the debt ceiling weeks ago and has been working hard behind the scenes to garner enough RINO and Democrat votes in the House to get to 218. All the histrionics recently has been a distraction that was needed in order give cover to the Republicans who will ultimately vote in favor of this sell-out legislation. Many of these Republican will soon be facing primary and third party challenges in their district because of this betrayal of principle. That will be the true test of our mettle. We must defeat a significant number of these weak-kneed, inside-the-beltway Judas.

  • sjwrick

    then he is worried about elections just like Obama.

  • red_oakster

    The rating agencies downgrade would be one more argument for abolishing the cozy oligopoly they enjoy. They are a joke and their downgrade or upgrade of US debt has little bearing on a multi-trillion dollar market.

  • silentcal2012

    Contrary to all the hype, CCB is not tied to the debt ceiling like some ankle bracelet. They can revisit over and over and over again.

    In actuality, it makes a good issue for 2012.

  • bclare

    aposematic is 100% correct. All this talk about 1.6T, or even 4.0T is useless.

    Erick you have a megaphone, use it. You say hold the line. I say ask this simple question. Regarding cuts to the deficit, what is the date we we realize these cuts and what will the DEBT be. Ask everyone who throws out a number.

  • pegasus

    SOOOO tired of hearing how everyone here loves the constitution, and “if so-and-so doesn’t fulfill his/her campaign promise, we’ll replace them in 2012″. Apparently, no – one remembers that WE THE PEOPLE have the right to FIRE our “representatives” if they fail to do what WE THE PEOPLE have hired them for (elected them to “represent” us)! This is known as RECALL. It was used during the 1st continental congress, when the representatives from one of the colonies (ok, I don’t remember which one at the moment) “kicked the can around” and stalled the vote on the Declaration of Independance. They were RECALLED by their colony, and REPLACED with representatives that enacted what the PEOPLE of said colony wanted enacted.
    Just think, actually following the laws set down in the constituition! Another plus would be that if we actually RECALLED those that are serving in their own best interests instead of WE THE PEOPLES, they could then bring about IMPEACHMENT of the current POTUS for his TREASONOUS actions. Jeez, what a concept!

  • zenarcade

    “Ultimately, John Boehner?s plan and Harry Reid?s plan are pretty close and both would probably result in a credit downgrade.”

    Standard & Poor’s for one (or at least an unnamed source therein) is saying the Reid plan would not result in a downgrade, though Boehner’s would. The problem, I would guess, with the Boehner plan is the uncertainty caused by having another debt ceiling vote so soon.

    (Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/erin-burnett-boehner-cnn-debt-ceiling-2011-7)

  • avgjo

    I’m not against recalls. But if we can’ t even muster a call for a primary, how do you expect to garner support for a recall?

  • jaykali

    I keep hearing tho that it’s going to make borrowing money more expensive at the govt level and consumer level. So even if the credit rating agencies are ridiculous if it makes interest rates go up that’s probably bad for everybody.

  • RDCook

    compromise = An agreement between the 2 sides to withdraw their fondling hands a little form each others front pockets so thay have the ability to reach further with their left to fleece the public